PDA

View Full Version : The Future with Obama


Bloggingheads
05-13-2008, 10:20 PM

David Thomson
05-13-2008, 10:39 PM
"Barry" Obama would easily win the election if he were a center-right presidential candidate. Unfortunately, he is a clone of George McGovern and a smoother talking version of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Obama and his guilt tripped white yuppie comrades have every intention of sticking it to non-Ivy League whites. They did it years ago regarding bussing and Griggs vs. Duke Power. God help these white folks if these clowns get another chance. The Harvard, Yale, Princeton, University of Chicago type of elites will sell them down the river simply to get an invitation to a present day "Radical Chic and Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers" cocktail party.

threep
05-13-2008, 11:36 PM
Keep rockin, David Thomson.

David Thomson
05-13-2008, 11:54 PM
Isn't it amazing about the racism of the black voters? Around 90% of them refuse to vote for a white woman. Only a man of color gets their support. Oh gosh, wasn't this sort of racist behavior supposed to have ended decades ago?

Eastwest
05-14-2008, 01:12 AM
Sometimes managed to pepper in 20 "ya-knows" per minute.

At least 1000 "ya-knows" in the course of the Diavlog.

And then there's the small problem of not having much to say that isn't just OHZ (Obama Homophily Zone) echo-speak. Yawn.

Please, Noam, learn to speak English. (Or could it be you're making a case for a new language form: "Wasp eubonics"?)

Tip: Think first, then speak.

Extra Credit game plan: Step completely outside of your standard idea input system, reflect on new inputs, conceive new ideation.

EW

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 01:31 AM
Isn't it amazing about the racism of the black voters? Around 90% of them refuse to vote for a white woman. Only a man of color gets their support. Oh gosh, wasn't this sort of racist behavior supposed to have ended decades ago?

Do you even believe your own claptrap?

Has it not occurred to you that blacks vote for whites, male and female, in overwhelming numbers in every election?

There is not one person on this board who could damage your reputation as much as you do all by yourself.

It never ceases to amaze me that so many on the right don't just hold views different from my own, but actually seem to be lunatics. I mean, like, crazy. Insane.

You are not well, friend.

AemJeff
05-14-2008, 01:49 AM
Do you even believe your own claptrap?

Has it not occurred to you that blacks vote for whites, male and female, in overwhelming numbers in every election?

There is not one person on this board who could damage your reputation as much as you do all by yourself.

It never ceases to amaze me that so many on the right don't just hold views different from my own, but actually seem to be lunatics. I mean, like, crazy. Insane.

You are not well, friend.

These points would have been so much better made without that fourth paragraph. Why generalize? If you want to fight with DT, he apparently likes the attention: you're doing him a favor. Why go on to start a fight with the entire universe of people who don't share your political viewpoint all at once?

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 01:55 AM
Good diavlog.

I thought Noam made a good case against the proposed "open debates" between McCain and Obama. He's right, I think -- this gives McCain an easy way to associate himself with a reasonable man -- Obama -- and disassociate himself from Bush.

I think Noam is also right to worry about Obama's instinct to be conciliatory -- this could make him look weak by comparison. This reminds me of the "Uncle Fluffy" worry voiced by the staff on The West Wing. I worry about this aspect less than I do the first of Noam's points, though.

I was glad to hear both come out against Clinton as VP, especially as they were able to offer solid reasons against that had nothing to do with residual personal dislike. I'd add another reason to oppose this idea -- even if she did a good job getting the ticket elected, I think she has the potential to be severely disrutptive once in office. I don't think she'd be comfortable in the Number 2 slot and I think both she and Bill would be constantly leaking their point of view on policy questions. I worry about a constant stream of stories in the WaPo and the NYT saying things like, "There remain serious disagreements at the highest levels of the White House concerning policy X. A senior official at the White House, who was granted anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions, said ..."

I am inclined to think Clinton doesn't want the job, at any rate, so this might well be moot.

I also thought Mark and Noam made some good points about Obama "versus" the netroots. I do think some of the A-list bloggers get a little carried away with their self-importance and tend to think that any politician who doesn't completely accept every one of their progressive goals is evil. Idealists are great, and I'm glad we have a renewed vigor on the left, but I do think some of these netroots types forget how impossible it would be to win, right now, on a platform they'd like to see. They (we) need to find some of the patience that the movement conservatives displayed -- keep building from the bottom up, focus on lower-level political offices and races, and keep pushing the message. The inertia of the voters takes time to overcome.

Another interesting point (passed along) by Mark: the idea that the Clintons think they've been through the meat grinder before, but that they're wrong to some degree, since lots has changed since the mid-1990s.

One last point that struck me: the excessive value placed upon loyalty and an inner circle by Hillary Clinton, especially, seemed right. How else to explain Mark Penn, et al?

David Thomson
05-14-2008, 02:00 AM
"You are not well, friend."

I simply have to look at the math. Obama gets around 90% of the black vote. What's up with that? Seems racist to me. But you have inadvertently pointed out how guilt tripped white left-wingers ignore black racism. This is why so many of them were stunned by the outrage over Jeremiah Wright's racist rants. The folks associated with Harvard, Yale, University of Chicago, and other "elite" school normally ho-hum such vile behavior. Reverse racism is fine with them. Ain't no big deal.

White left-wingers also consider it OK to lie to blue collar Democrats. This is what occurred when Obama told the "white trash" in Ohio that he was against NAFTA---while sending out his "unofficial representative" Altan Goolsbee to say the exact opposite to the Canadian government officials.

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 02:16 AM
These points would have been so much better made without that fourth paragraph. Why generalize? If you want to fight with DT, he apparently likes the attention: you're doing him a favor. Why go on to start a fight with the entire universe of people who don't share your political viewpoint all at once?

That's a fair point, and I appreciate the feedback. And I do believe that the overwhelming majority of conservatives (broadly defined) are basically sane. But I also sincerely find myself amazed at the sheer amount of frank mental instability one sees on the right, particularly in the activist base of the Republican Party, where mental problems are almost a condition of membership.

As much as anything else, I think political attitudes and orientation are psychological. And I think it's fairly non-controversial to observe that a large swath of the Republican base suffers from mental problems.

Did you see kidneystones raving post about Obama's "Christianist" strategy in Kentucky? I went to the site he linked to, and was amazed by the sheer derangement of the comments. Have you ever been to Free Republic? It's a genuine freak show, and honestly a delight to read.

Still: I would feel awful if anyone thought I was saying ALL conservatives are insane. Thomson is. Kidneystones is. Whatfur has severe issues, at least. But Piscivorous is sane, as are some of the other conservatives.

So, "I apologize if any conservatives were offended by my remarks." Except the crazy ones. (LOL)

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 02:20 AM
Sometimes managed to pepper in 20 "ya-knows" per minute.

At least 1000 "ya-knows" in the course of the Diavlog.

And then there's the small problem of not having much to say that isn't just OHZ (Obama Homophily Zone) echo-speak. Yawn.

Please, Noam, learn to speak English. (Or could it be you're making a case for a new language form: "Wasp eubonics"?)

Tip: Think first, then speak.

Extra Credit game plan: Step completely outside of your standard idea input system, reflect on new inputs, conceive new ideation.

EW

What exactly does saying "ya know" (or anything else about how Noam spoke, which I thought was fine) have to do with ebonics?

Can you explain why you are drawing a connection to ebonics here?

Wonderment
05-14-2008, 03:17 AM
God help these white folks ...


I wish I was in the land of cotton, old times there are not forgotten,
Look away, look away, look away, Dixie Land.
In Dixie Land I'll take my stand to live and die in Dixie,
Away, away, away down South in Dixie,
Away, away, away down South in Dixie

Wonderment
05-14-2008, 03:20 AM
Can you explain why you are drawing a connection to ebonics here?

Just EW's way of denigrating African Americans for amusement. What could be wrong with that?

piscivorous
05-14-2008, 08:29 AM
Or it could be that Mr. Scheiber has noticed that Senator Obama seems to do less well in an unscripted environment. It seems that it is when the Senator is speaking extemporaneously he has said a few things that have gotten himself in trouble. There is also quite a bit of discussion about the few speeches, where he has had teleprompter troubles, being somewhat less than inspiring.

As I generally think that anyone who watches the freak shows, we call debates in America, on a regular basis needs to have their head examined; but I sat through two of each parties circle jerks and in the two Democratic spectacles, I did see, it did appear the Senator Obama was the less skillful at extemporaneous speaking.

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 08:48 AM
pisc:

Yes, I agree that speaking off the cuff is apparently not Obama's long suit. This surprises me.

harkin
05-14-2008, 09:37 AM
Ah, the comedy when liberals attempt to tag people with using 'eubonics' [?] or being 'white folk' (is this a variation of BO's 'typical white person'?). This is as funny as the race-baiting and sexism by both Clintons ("so did Jesse Jackson", "hard-working Americans....white Americans") and Obama (Bros before Ho's) supporters being labled as 'republican-style' or 'Rovian' 'attacks' - please keep the yucks coming.

While the results of the early-to-mid primaries certainly seems to affirm the belief of those who say Obama's speaking talents are incredible and charismatic, I've yet to hear him speak where he doesn't remind me of M Dukakis. Can anyone link me to a speech where he showed any sort of charisma?

His speech/pc where he did his about-face on Rev Wright was one of the most uninspired pieces of political speaking I've seen done during the current campaign, especially the section where he cited the facts that Wright had merely been his pastor for twenty years, married the Obamas and baptized their children......but that didn't make him any kind of spiritual advisor. That he could utter this incredible BS while maintaining a straight face certainly spoke to his talents, but not enough to make a claim he could inspire anyone able to think for themselves.

And others (not just conservatives) will continue to rate candidates on how 'liberal' they are as long as liberals themselves keep running from the tag. Hearing liberals try and transform themselves into 'progressives' has to be one of the funnier ad campaigns of the last twenty years, especially as they act more liberal today than ever before (earth to libs, JFK, RFK and Harry Truman would all be Repubs today unless they wanted to risk being 'Leiberman'd').

I guess I would be forced to make a concession to 'progs' if they went out of their way to define 'progressive' as the ground between 'liberal' and 'radical'.

piscivorous
05-14-2008, 09:52 AM
One of the advantages the Senator McCain will have in the general election, against the uniter Senator Obama, is the considerable amount of praise that the Democrats themselves have heaped upon Senator McCain for his bipartisanship (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9Jtl51aWb0). If the republicans are smart they will use this freely available content to counter the talk of Senator Obama's claim to being the uniter, even as it might aggravate the conservative base.

deebee
05-14-2008, 10:28 AM
Interesting conversation. Much of the Netroots (MoveOn, Kos, etc.) seemed to lose their influence with Obama when they offered him their undying love early on. He has pretty much ignored them since then.

Regarding the Insular Issue, Joe Scarborough said that Hillary was very warm to the Gingrich Freshmen and that anyone who saw her in a personal setting realized that she was no Dragon Lady. By contrast, Bush had has poor relations with his own Republican Congress, often infuriating them with his arrogance and dismissive attitude.

Obama is also quite insular, particularly when it comes to the Press Corps -- rarely speaks with them in a casual setting and seems to despise press conferences (maybe he can duck those if he becomes President). Could this reluctance be directed at the preservation of a mystique that might vanish upon close inspection? Unlikely that Obama will do unmoderated debates -- too risky -- might help but could prove devastating.

David Broder made the “They trashed the house" comment.

thouartgob
05-14-2008, 12:07 PM
Good diavlog and I thought the census stuff was quite useful. Besides the article on the census right-ins here is a link from TPM (with helpful map) and gives more context.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/194870.php

I don't know about Hillary but Bill has enough scotch-irish blood in him so clanishness helps there.

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 12:15 PM
pisc:

Yes, I agree that speaking off the cuff is apparently not Obama's long suit. This surprises me.

I slightly agree, but not to the extent that the right wing noise machine (which is actively promoting this meme; e.g., it's a regular "observation" made by Bill O'Reilly) wants me to.

Did you watch Obama's recent (extemporaneous) interview with Wolf Blitzer? I thought his ability to extemporize and speak without a script was extremely impressive. I bet he's a lot more impressive than Pisc would be in the same situation. Or me, for that matter. Or anyone else on this board. That's a given, right?

I think Obama's problem is that he actually thinks while he speaks. Rote repetition, an important skill for a politician, is less prone to some of the occasional (let's not overstate the case) halting and pausing we see in Obama. People whose minds are whirling away while they speak often don't deliver the crisp soundbites that work well on television. This problem is particularly acute in highly intelligent people.

If you haven't seen the interview, you can watch it here:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvdueV5p4eY
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kLwXMD0QUg&feature=related

I saw another thread on this board where some folks were talking about Obama's ability to be a fighter instead of a pushover. I would say that Obama dispelled some of those concerns, too, in this interview, showing some of the steel he'll need in the coming slime campaign.

Basically, I think he's going to wipe the floor with McCain. Of course, the MSM will be actively trying to destroy him, so he has his work cut out for him.

Forgive me for rambling, but I would also say the prolonged campaign has been a blessing for both Hillary and Obama: both have improved considerably with all the practice. At this point in 2004, John Kerry was basically vacationing and getting rusty while waiting for the campaign to get started. Unfortunately for Hillary, she's not going to have much chance to put her improved skills to use, since she's about to be put in mothballs for the rest of her career. (I hope.)

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 12:19 PM
"You are not well, friend."

I simply have to look at the math. Obama gets around 90% of the black vote. What's up with that? Seems racist to me. But you have inadvertently pointed out how guilt tripped white left-wingers ignore black racism. This is why so many of them were stunned by the outrage over Jeremiah Wright's racist rants. The folks associated with Harvard, Yale, University of Chicago, and other "elite" school normally ho-hum such vile behavior. Reverse racism is fine with them. Ain't no big deal.

White left-wingers also consider it OK to lie to blue collar Democrats. This is what occurred when Obama told the "white trash" in Ohio that he was against NAFTA---while sending out his "unofficial representative" Altan Goolsbee to say the exact opposite to the Canadian government officials.

What's behind your intense dislike of Harvard, Yale, UC, "and other 'elite' schools"?

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 12:31 PM
Interesting conversation. Much of the Netroots (MoveOn, Kos, etc.) seemed to lose their influence with Obama when they offered him their undying love early on. He has pretty much ignored them since then.
Pure speculation supported by nothing.


Regarding the Insular Issue, Joe Scarborough said that Hillary was very warm to the Gingrich Freshmen and that anyone who saw her in a personal setting realized that she was no Dragon Lady. By contrast, Bush had has poor relations with his own Republican Congress, often infuriating them with his arrogance and dismissive attitude.
And yet they still gave Bush everything he wanted. They are like abused children, severely mistreated and scared into total obedience. Profiles in cowardice.



Obama is also quite insular, particularly when it comes to the Press Corps -- rarely speaks with them in a casual setting and seems to despise press conferences (maybe he can duck those if he becomes President). Could this reluctance be directed at the preservation of a mystique that might vanish upon close inspection?
Pure speculation supported by nothing.



Unlikely that Obama will do unmoderated debates -- too risky -- might help but could prove devastating.
Pure speculation supported by nothing.

And when's the last time there was an unmoderated debate in presidential politics? I suppose while you are busily filling your head with assumptions unconnected to evidence, you're also speculating that the Heroic Saint McCain would readily embrace unmoderated debates, despite the fact that this, too, would be pure speculation supported by nothing.



David Broder made the “They trashed the house" comment.
Yeah, the "liberal" David Broder, who hated the Clintons and loves George W. Bush. And you got the quote wrong. It was "he," not "they," and it was "this place," not "the house."

Here's what Broder said: "Clinton's behavior is unacceptable. If they did this at the local Elks Club hall in some other community it would be a big cause for concern. [...] He came in here and he trashed the place, and it's not his place." (Yeah, it's Broder's and his pals' place.)

Funny how that dipshit never had any concerns about what Bush was doing.

Here's another quote from the Dean of the liberal media establishment: "Let me disclose my own bias in this matter. I like Karl Rove.... I have eaten quail at his table and admired the splendid Hill Country landscape from the porch of [Rove's] historic cabin...."

Isn't that sweet?

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 12:32 PM
Big Wayne:

I slightly agree, but not to the extent that the right wing noise machine (which is actively promoting this meme; e.g., it's a regular "observation" made by Bill O'Reilly) wants me to.

Did you watch Obama's recent (extemporaneous) interview with Wolf Blitzer?

You're right. I should have been a little more nuanced in my earlier reply. And yes, I did watch the Blitzer interview.

I like the way Obama doesn't speak in talking points or clichés. I like that he's not one for shooting from the hip, and I agree -- it indicates thoughtfulness, a quality sorely lacking in most politicians these days. Still, every so often I watch him in a debate or interview and feel myself saying, "C'mon, Barack! You know the answer -- just spit it out!" As you said, the sad reality of life in a sound bite age is that to be successful, a politician needs to be able to deliver them once in a while.

Of course, every time he's succinct, the usual suspects then trot out the "arrogant" (read: "uppity") and "abrasive" (read: "angry black man") memes, so I guess there's no winning this one.

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 12:51 PM
Still, every so often I watch him in a debate or interview and feel myself saying, "C'mon, Barack! You know the answer -- just spit it out!"
Yeah, you are definitely right. I've had the same reaction myself. This was particularly true in the early debates. And I can't deny it has given me pause regarding his ability to compete in the general. As you said: "in a sound bite age is that to be successful, a politician needs to be able to deliver them once in a while." Let's hope this isn't a problem going forward.

Clearly, the Republicans want to maximize the focus and attention on this weakness, which is why I'm reluctant to help them spread it. If Republicans can get everyone thinking and talking about this "flaw," it will come to seem worse than it is.

This concept was best expressed by (of all people) Steadman Graham in an interview on Larry King Live:

"[W]hatever you focus on expands, so the key is not to focus on it [...] If you don't want something to expand, don't focus on it, whether it's negative or positive. You know if you want -- if you want to expand, you know, something that's positive then you can focus on that. If you want to expand something that's negative then focus on that."

Clearly, Republicans will be working to focus our attention on this slight defect in Obama's extemporaneous presentation, and any other defect they can think of.

Update: I guess Stedman Graham isn't the first person (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGIT,GGIT:2007-02,GGIT:en&q=what+you+focus+on+expands) to express this idea.

Another thought: Obama's brilliant oratory when delivering prepared remarks is also probably partially to blame for the feeling that his extemporaneous speech is less than perfect.


Of course, every time he's succinct, the usual suspects then trot out the "arrogant" (read: "uppity") and "abrasive" (read: "angry black man") memes, so I guess there's no winning this one.
Haha, good point. It just goes to show how they are going to trash him no matter what. And if he becomes president, watch out. The entire MSM will miraculous rediscover it's "watchdog" role after 8 years of sleeping on the job.

piscivorous
05-14-2008, 01:04 PM
I slightly agree, but not to the extent that the right wing noise machine (which is actively promoting this meme; e.g., it's a regular "observation" made by Bill O'Reilly) wants me to. From the nature of you comments sounds like you spend a lot of time watching Mr. O'Reilly. From what I see from the right there is some chatter about this but it is not one of the more pressing meme out on the right.

Did you watch Obama's recent (extemporaneous) interview with Wolf Blitzer? I thought his ability to extemporize and speak without a script was extremely impressive. I bet he's a lot more impressive than Pisc would be in the same situation. Or me, for that matter. Or anyone else on this board. That's a given, right? To paraphrase what seems to be one of your favorite phrases "Pure speculation supported by nothing"

I think Obama's problem is that he actually thinks while he speaks. Rote repetition, an important skill for a politician, is less prone to some of the occasional (let's not overstate the case) halting and pausing we see in Obama. People whose minds are whirling away while they speak often don't deliver the crisp soundbites that work well on television. This problem is particularly acute in highly intelligent people.
I know we dumb uneducated know nothing trailer trash always speak in sound bits. Don't know about you but I know numerous educated individuals that can wax eloquently when needed and mingle with the rest of us po white trash when the occasion arises. If anything it speaks to his training as a lawyer, with their habitual need to parse language so as to expose the bare minimum of information while still sounding cognizant and erudite.


If you haven't seen the interview, you can watch it here:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvdueV5p4eY
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kLwXMD0QUg&feature=related
I saw another thread on this board where some folks were talking about Obama's ability to be a fighter instead of a pushover. I would say that Obama dispelled some of those concerns, too, in this interview, showing some of the steel he'll need in the coming slime campaign.

Basically, I think he's going to wipe the floor with McCain. Of course, the MSM will be actively trying to destroy him, so he has his work cut out for him. Given the socioeconomic conditions in America today that's going way out on a limb don't you think? And while your rant about the press trying to destroy Senator Obama is entertaining apparently not everyone agrees (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b1e_1203868016); which I find exceeds your entertainment skills considerably.

Forgive me for rambling, but I would also say the prolonged campaign has been a blessing for both Hillary and Obama: both have improved considerably with all the practice. At this point in 2004, John Kerry was basically vacationing and getting rusty while waiting for the campaign to get started. Unfortunately for Hillary, she's not going to have much chance to put her improved skills to use, since she's about to be put in mothballs for the rest of her career. (I hope.)I actually agree with most of this but have a problem with the spiteful bit at the end.

AemJeff
05-14-2008, 01:05 PM
Fair enough. I will say that that calling Kidneystones a "conservative" is like saying that a cloud looks like a puppy. Wait until the next gust of wind...

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 01:19 PM
Fair enough. I will say that that calling Kidneystones a "conservative" is like saying that a cloud looks like a puppy. Wait until the next gust of wind...

LOL. Is he not a conservative? I don't know him well; I was just judging by his intensely anti-Obama posts that all end with "Go McCain!!!"

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 01:25 PM
Big Wayne:

Clearly, the Republicans want to maximize the focus and attention on this weakness, which is why I'm reluctant to help them spread it. If Republicans can get everyone thinking and talking about this "flaw," it will come to seem worse than it is.

You're right about this. I have become convinced that one of the reasons that the right has been so successful over the past couple of decades is that they will never budge on anything and never tire of repeating whatever it is they're on about, while liberals have had the habit of conceding points in an effort to move forward. And this does work -- I still feel bad about making "that's why Al Gore invented the Internet" jokes, back in 2000. So now, I usually play the game the way the right wants to play it -- concede nothing. But on this board, with someone from the other side who can also be reasonable at times, it seems only fair. You have to reward those conservatives who are willing to go off message.

Another thought: Obama's brilliant oratory when delivering prepared remarks is also probably partially to blame for the feeling that his extemporaneous speech is less than perfect.

That's an interesting thought. I think you're right.

The entire MSM will miraculous rediscover it's "watchdog" role after 8 years of sleeping on the job.

Indeed. And then puff up defensively when they get called on it: "What, we're doing what you wanted us to!"

It's an ongoing problem, though. Most of the MSM is so thin-skinned about being called "the liberal media" that they overcompensate. And it is just not in the nature of liberals to be mindless cheerleaders the way some on the right are happy to be. Say what you will about MSNBC, I can't imagine them being the analog of Fox once Obama gets into office.

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 01:33 PM
From the nature of you comments sounds like you spend a lot of time watching Mr. O'Reilly. From what I see from the right there is some chatter about this but it is not one of the more pressing meme out on the right.
No, not at all. However despite this I have still heard him trying to make an issue out of Obama's ability to speak extemoraneously on multiple occasions.




To paraphrase what seems to be one of your favorite phrases "Pure speculation supported by nothing"
You're right; there could be some people on this board who could present themselves BETTER than Obama in all of the various fora Obama is judged in. You may well be one of them.

Likewise, there might be people on this board who are better baseball players than most of the people in the major leagues. I think it would be safe to assume there isn't a single person on this board who could either (a) play in the majors, or (b) outperform Obama on the national stage, but you're right: it's speculation.



I know we dumb uneducated know nothing trailer trash always speak in sound bits.
Wow, that sounds defensive. I said nothing about you being dumb, or "trailer trash," or "know nothings," or "uneducated" people. You read all of that into my statement.

And you should know something: intelligence does not correlate well to education levels, or (for that matter) wealth. The studies I've seen show that intelligence is more or less equally distributed among socioeconomic groups and among people of different education levels. (I will add that the data I saw were from the 1980s.)

All I was trying to say was that a lot of smart people seem to think while they are talking and sometimes this interupts the smooth flow of their presentation. But you could be right; this might just be bunk.



Don't know about you but I know numerous educated individuals
Again, I was talking about intelligent, not educated, people. There's a difference.



that can wax eloquently when needed and mingle with the rest of us po white trash when the occasion arises.
This has nothing to do with anyone's ability to mingle with po white trash. Again, you're showing some strange defensiveness.



If anything it speaks to his training as a lawyer, with their habitual need to parse language so as to expose the bare minimum of information while still sounding cognizant and erudite.
That's a good point. You may well be right. That explanation may be better than mine.



Given the socioeconomic conditions in America today that's going way out on a limb don't you think?
Any statement that starts with "I think" is by definition not "going out on a limb." It's totally qualified. Having said that, I don't know how today's socioeconomic conditions are going to help McCain.



I actually agree with most of this but have a problem with the spiteful bit at the end.
I wrote one sentence about the press. Doesn't a rant have to go on for a while to really be considered a rant? I don't think you can rant in nine words.



I actually agree with most of this but have a problem with the spiteful bit at the end.
Spiteful? There's nothing spiteful in my statement. I simply expressed my hope that Hillary loses the nomination battle.

piscivorous
05-14-2008, 01:49 PM
You are new to the conversation here so you may not understand that you may not understand that I can every so often be a bit of a satirical cynic. If you read the comment with this in mind it may help in your understanding. I would also note that you are one of the rare ones here if your reference to "highly intelligent people" actually meant "highly intelligent people" as it seems to be code here, and for many of those on the left, for the educated elite. Since that is the context in which I read it; that is the context of how my response was based.

AemJeff
05-14-2008, 02:06 PM
The KOS commenter (http://www.dailykos.com/search?offset=0&old_count=30&string=Kidneystones&type=diary_by&sortby=relevance&search=Search&count=30&wayback=1051200&wayfront=0) of the same name is also the same person. We can draw our own conclusions, I guess.

uncle ebeneezer
05-14-2008, 02:12 PM
I usually play the game the way the right wants to play it -- concede nothing. But on this board, with someone from the other side who can also be reasonable at times, it seems only fair. You have to reward those conservatives who are willing to go off message.

Brendan, don't make me have to start calling you Neville Chamberlain, you appeaser you.

Big Wayne, welcome to the board. I've been enjoying your posts and they seem "highly intelligent" in their content.

Big Wayne
05-14-2008, 02:21 PM
The KOS commenter (http://www.dailykos.com/search?offset=0&old_count=30&string=Kidneystones&type=diary_by&sortby=relevance&search=Search&count=30&wayback=1051200&wayfront=0) of the same name is also the same person. We can draw our own conclusions, I guess.

Wow. A Kosian? That blows my mind.

Is kidneystones gay?

piscivorous
05-14-2008, 02:27 PM
Not to harp on the issue of Senator Obama's extemporaneous speaking proclivities but here is current sample.

During a speech in Cape Girardeau, Missourihe Senator Obama spoke of the need for more Arabic speakers in Afghanistan.If they are all in Iraq, then its harder for us to use them in Afghanistan. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae-Ak9WuUio)

It's a minor detail I know but the Afghans don't speak Arabic; they speak Dari and Pashto.

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 02:28 PM
Brendan, don't make me have to start calling you Neville Chamberlain, you appeaser you.

Heh. Not to worry. Think of it more like this: sometimes you use tae kwan do, sometimes you use jiu jitsu.

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 02:30 PM
Not to harp on the issue of Senator Obama's extemporaneous speaking proclivities but ...

... I will now proceed to harp.

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 02:32 PM
Tell you what, Pisc: You give the nitpicking about Obama's verbal slips a rest, and I won't highlight every misspelled word and typo in your posts.

piscivorous
05-14-2008, 02:32 PM
Hey I could have made it about his lack of foreign policy knowledge!

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 02:35 PM
Hey I could have made it about his lack of foreign policy knowledge!

In general, that would be much more preferable. In this case, I think it would not be warranted -- I'm sure there are plenty of Arabic-speaking troublemakers afoot in Afghanistan, for one thing, and for another, you really don't want to start judging a candidate's foreign policy views by one sentence, do you? Especially as a supporter of the candidate who still seems unable to keep the Sunni/Shia distinction straight.

deebee
05-14-2008, 02:45 PM
Big Wayne: Pure speculation supported by nothing....Pure speculation supported by nothing...Pure speculation supported by nothing....it's [Washington] Broder's and his pals' place.

I prefer to think of my "speculations" as perception based on personal observations coupled with a whole lot of reading.

As for Broder, I definitely agree with your assessment of the man's arrogance. The Clintons were never "one of them" and the Bushes were -- hence the double standard. Of course, we will have to wait until the Bushes leave the White House before we know exactly what gems of wisdom will issue out of Broder's mouth -- but I wouldn't hold my breath that it will be anything negative -- he'll probably just keep quiet.

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 02:49 PM
As for Broder ... I wouldn't hold my breath that it will be anything negative -- he'll probably just keep quiet.

Did you mean that you don't expect Broder to say anything negative about Bush once he leaves office, or that you don't expect Broder to say anything negative about the next president?

piscivorous
05-14-2008, 03:21 PM
Yep there are probably one or two Arabic speakers in the area I'm sure. But as these will immediately sort of stand out they can be sent to some sort of holding facility where you know there will be one or two that speak Arabic. The demand is just not there for it to be a real salient point. If I were going to use this particular line of attack it would be more honestly directed at the intelligence community and it's shortage of translators and the failing of higher education to provide individuals with these particular skill set. One of the reasons I made the comment is exactly the to address the point "...judging a candidate's foreign policy views by one sentence, do you?". As what is good for the goose is good for the gander. don't think I am the only one out there that see this, and some other recent foreign policy statements, as balance to the Sunni/Shia distinction thing.

deebee
05-14-2008, 03:51 PM
BJ Keefe: Did you mean that you don't expect Broder to say anything negative about Bush once he leaves office, or that you don't expect Broder to say anything negative about the next president?

I was referring to Bush -- Broder has gone pretty easy on Bush considering the magnitude of the man's transgressions and I believe that over the years, he has lost some of his luster as a sober, objective commentator. Have no idea how he will handle the next White House occupant.....probably depends on whether he or she is deemed to be "acceptable" by the Washington glitterati.

bjkeefe
05-14-2008, 04:07 PM
deebee:

Thanks. I don't read Broder enough to say. Just wanted to know what you meant.

artoad
05-15-2008, 07:07 AM
As a conservative whose gone over to Obama, I must say its his considered patrician style that I find appealing. Do I have qualms and doubts? Of course. But consider the alternative. I know it's a gut reaction, but McCain has to have one of the most off-putting discomfiting presentations in politics. Continuing with intestinal metaphor; Did you see him discussing whether he voted for Bush or not in 2000 on O'Reilly? I never seen a more stomach-churning display of shiftiness. Camille Paglia nailed him with the following description-"a clumsy,fusty,narcissistic waffler". Call me shallow, but I will take Obama's sleek demeanor in my living room for four years. The thought of McCain's weasally persona filling the above role is more than I can bear.

johnmarzan
05-16-2008, 01:04 AM
let's see, the future with obama, a not-united democratic party if he doesn't offer hillary the VP position.

Big Wayne
05-16-2008, 01:12 AM
let's see, the future with obama, a not-united democratic party if he doesn't offer hillary the VP position.

Yeah, but, you see, we're all afflicted with BDS here in the Democratic Party. Our irrational rage will make us forget our differences as we swarm to the polls like mindless Bush bashing automatons pull the lever for whatever Democrat is on the ballot.

johnmarzan
05-16-2008, 01:33 AM
Yeah, but, you see, we're all afflicted with BDS here in the Democratic Party. Our irrational rage will make us forget our differences as we swarm to the polls like mindless Bush bashing automatons pull the lever for whatever Democrat is on the ballot.

but what if hillary runs a third party candidacy?

http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/hillary_perot.php

piscivorous
05-16-2008, 01:34 AM
You know I'm beginning to like your sense of humor. To bad it is going to waste on the dark side(no slur intended).

rgajria
05-16-2008, 01:39 AM
Bush wants us
to cut the amount of gas we use.....
The best way
to stop using so much gas is to deport 11 million illegal
immigrants!
That would be 11 million less people using our gas. The price of gas
would come down.
Bring our troops home from Iraq to guard the Border....
When they catch an illegal immigrant crossing the border, hand him a
canteen, rifle and some ammo and ship him to Iraq ...
Tell him if he wants to come to America then he must serve a tour in the
military....
Give him a soldier's pay while he's there and tax him on it.....
After his tour, he will be allowed to become a citizen since he defended
this country....
He will also be registered to be taxed and be a legal patriot..... .
This option will probably deter illegal immigration and provide a
solution for the troops in Iraq and
the aliens trying to make a better life for themselves.. ....
If they refuse to serve, ship them to Iraq anyway, without the canteen,
rifle or ammo.....
Problem solved.....
If you
think this is a good solution to both the problems, forward it
to ALL your friends.
............
I just did.........

rgajria
05-16-2008, 01:39 AM
Thats George Carlin I'm quoting.

Big Wayne
05-16-2008, 01:53 AM
http://www.appscout.com/images/spam%20boy.jpg

Big Wayne
05-16-2008, 02:02 AM
Thats George Carlin I'm quoting.

No, it's not (http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/carlingas.asp). That insane rant is diametrically opposed to anything Carlin would say.

Why is it that right-wingers are constantly attempting to attribute their most hateful ideas to this great liberal comedian?

Here are two more examples:

-- Hurrican Rules (http://www.snopes.com/katrina/soapbox/carlin.asp) (bashing disaster victims in classic, compassionate conservative fashion)
-- The Bad American (http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/carlin.asp)

bjkeefe
05-16-2008, 09:15 AM
Whoa! Go Big Wayne!

Marie
05-16-2008, 05:26 PM
As a black voter for Obama I take exception to you calling me bigoted just because I am not voting for Hillary Clinton. Obama had to earn my vote and, if you were to research the early polls, you would see that Senator Clinton started out with a tremendous advantage in the black community and that he had to earn their votes too. Sen. Clinton lost the black vote because she and her husband started marginalizing Sen. Obama, beginning with the Jesse Jackson comparison which was ridiculous. Obama won the black vote because he is viewed as a leader of integrity, judgment and experience. His experience may not be "Washington" experience but 8 years as a State Senator and a term as a U.S. Senator works for me and apparently others -- black and white. Hillary's experience worked for me too but her embellishments killed it. I would not vote for Barack just because he is black -- and I would not vote for Hillary just because she is a woman.

graz
05-16-2008, 05:38 PM
As a black voter for Obama I take exception to you calling me bigoted just because I am not voting for Hillary Clinton. Obama had to earn my vote and, if you were to research the early polls, you would see that Senator Clinton started out with a tremendous advantage in the black community and that he had to earn their votes too. Sen. Clinton lost the black vote because she and her husband started marginalizing Sen. Obama, beginning with the Jesse Jackson comparison which was ridiculous. Obama won the black vote because he is viewed as a leader of integrity, judgment and experience. His experience may not be "Washington" experience but 8 years as a State Senator and a term as a U.S. Senator works for me and apparently others -- black and white. Hillary's experience worked for me too but her embellishments killed it. I would not vote for Barack just because he is black -- and I would not vote for Hillary just because she is a woman.

Thanks Marie for a definitive rebuttal to the provocateur.

laurelnyc
05-20-2008, 12:56 AM
Oh great, Naom! So your concern for too many unmoderated debates with McCain & Obama is because you're afraid that voters will get to think with their brains rather than being spoon-fed by the media their packaged image of candidates. So much for Obama not being a candidate of "old politics." Honestly, he's one of the most dishonest candidates that we've had in a long time. All image, but nothing below the surface. Sure America doesn't care about the product as long as it's packaged and marketed well.

Why are you afraid of Obama ruining his marketing script if he let's us see his true self? Obviously not even Obama supporters believe him!

laurelnyc
05-20-2008, 01:00 AM
And yes, this only reaffirms to me what a WIMP he is! If he truly believes in what he says, get rid of teleprompters and pre-written speeches for mass rallies and sit down and have a real unscripted conversation. I'd like to see that kind of change in politics. Will Mr Candidate of Change be true to his words? I doubt it. All talk, no action.

bjkeefe
05-20-2008, 05:55 AM
laurelnyc:

You make some fair points, if exaggerated. Speaking as an Obama fan, I would like to see him do some more of what you ask, too.

On the other hand, it should also be kept in mind that the ability to debate is not the full measure of the worthiness of a candidate. It should also be noted that one lesson Obama has learned from past Republican successes is that tight message control is good for a campaign, particularly in this era of gotcha media. It's hard to argue with success.

I'll also point out that he has participated in over twenty debates during the primary, and he has indicated a clear willingness to debate John McCain during the general.

If you aren't getting enough out of his speeches as regards specific policy proposals and views on the issues, you might do some reading here (http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/).

Finally, if you'd like to see him speaking without a teleprompter, such video is available. For example, from the past few days, here (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2008/05/no-more-mr-nice-guy.html) are some extemporaneous remarks, and here (http://www.ta-nehisi.com/2008/05/if-you-are-a-pr.html) is a press conference.

rgajria
05-21-2008, 05:01 AM
Oops, Sorry, Should have checked the source. I just thought it was funny so I posted it.