Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Barack Obama Needs to Fill in the Blanks

By John Nichols, The Nation. Posted January 19, 2007.


If Barack Obama is to secure critical grassroots support for his presidential bid, he must be less about celebrity and more about policy.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by John Nichols

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Barack Obama surprised even some seasoned political observers when he coupled the announcement that he had formed an exploratory 2008 presidential campaign committee with the news that he is all but certain to formally enter the race for the Democratic nomination on February 10. But there was nothing surprising about the message he presented.

It was more of the same vaguely satisfying criticism of "the smallness of our politics" and the way government is "gummed up by money and influence," along with flowery promises to "tackle the big problems that demand solutions" and help us "come together around our common interests and concerns as Americans."

To his credit, Obama recognized in his announcement many of the challenges that face the United States: skyrocketing healthcare bills, lost pensions, the high price of a college education, the need to break our dependence on foreign oil and, above all, the fact that "we're still mired in a tragic and costly war that should have never been waged."

But, as has been the case since speculation heated up about a run by the freshman senator from Illinois, Obama was long on personal appeal and short on policy specifics.

The seriousness with which he approaches the task of defining his politics between now and February 10 will go a long way toward deciding whether Obama wins his party's nomination. If he's going to secure the critical support of grassroots Democrats in key early caucus and primary states, these coming weeks must be less about celebrity and more about policy.

To be sure, Obama is a superstar, which allows him to leap over many of the hurdles erected by the overseers of the political process. Even before his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, he was the most prominent state legislator in the nation.

After his speech, favorably received by delegates and by most of the political and media class, he secured his Senate seat and arrived in Washington accompanied by some of the highest expectations ever attached to a new member of Congress.

Predictably, Obama failed to meet those inflated expectations. His relative caution on the big-picture issues of Iraq and domestic civil liberties, combined with some disappointing votes on consumer and economic issues, alienated many activists. As Obama made the rounds of state party conventions, fundraising events and rallies during the 2006 Congressional election season, however, grassroots Democrats remembered his inspired convention speech rather than his uninspired votes in Washington. And they gave the Senate's only black member a welcome that most politicians can only dream of. The message from the party faithful was clear: New York Senator Hillary Clinton, the presumed frontrunner, had not closed the deal. There was an opening for another first-tier contender in the race, and Obama could take it.

Can Obama catch up with Clinton and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards, both of whom are far ahead in putting together the multistate campaign apparatus needed for a fast-paced presidential campaign? Yes, but only if the grassroots Democrats who have been so enthusiastic about the prospect of his candidacy now turn that enthusiasm into practical commitments in states like Iowa (where the first caucuses will be held a year from now) Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

That transition will have something to do with Obama's star power, of course, but it will have much more to do with the intensity and effectiveness of his calls for ending the war in Iraq, restoring civil liberties protections at home and undoing the Bush Administration's misguided economic policies.

As he attempts that task, there will be a good deal of media discussion about how Obama must compete with Clinton, but that's not the right test. If she runs, Clinton will do so as what she is: a cautious centrist with lots of money and prominent support but with dubious appeal to the activists who define the early stages of the nomination process. Obama's more serious challenge will be to make sure he compares favorably with Edwards. The 2004 Democratic nominee for Vice President has done a good job of identifying himself as the Democrat who wants to bring the troops home from Iraq -- most recently in a speech at New York's Riverside Church, where he recalled the antiwar rhetoric of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and called for Congressional Democrats to refuse to fund the Iraq "surge."

On the home front Edwards has advocated tax fairness, universal healthcare and living-wage protections. And he has spent a lot of time talking about those issues with activists with the power to make or break candidates. Edwards is attracting endorsements -- particularly from labor union leaders and members -- and the volunteer support that is required in high-maintenance states like Iowa and Nevada.

There's no question that Democrats like Barack Obama. But they don't necessarily know why. If Obama can fill in the blanks, he could trump Clinton and Edwards. If he can't, he'll likely join the long list of Presidents who might have been.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: election08, barack obama

John Nichols is The Nation's Washington correspondent.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
" wheres the beef"
Posted by: okie11 on Jan 19, 2007 12:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
obama is for sure a smart guy, but you are right lay something on the table that americans can chew on. i think he would be great on bottom side of a edwards ticket.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: " wheres the beef" Posted by: jmooney
» Here is the beef... Posted by: bassman
Lesser of evils already?
Posted by: ScottP on Jan 19, 2007 1:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We're a year away from the first primaries, and the author claims we're already stuck chosing between a war supporter, a former war supporter who conceded defeat before all the votes were counted (and wouldn't ask for a re-count), and someone who refuses to stake positions on key issues and will only talk in broad generalities about apple pies. It seems a bit early to me to concede defeat and choose the lesser of evils.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lesser of evils already? Posted by: VZEQICVA
Presidential Candidates
Posted by: rg on Jan 19, 2007 1:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The US doesn't need yet one more 100 million Dollar runway model.
I agree, if he doesn't start putting some cards on the table, voters who want to take the country back from puppets for lobbyists, special interest groups, and mega-corporations, should start looking somewhere else.
For example; he says that he believes that gays and lesbians should have civil rights, but he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman - what does that mean when it's time for him make a decision?
We all know that politicos are masters at gliding across thin ice without leave a mark, but those days need to end.
Get a spine or get a move on, Obama.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Presidential Candidates Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Presidential Candidates Posted by: jmp3954
» RE: Presidential Candidates Posted by: MartianBachelor
Obama...
Posted by: gjames on Jan 19, 2007 1:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He's the real deal. You'll see.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Obama... Posted by: shanaza
» RE: Mass Media Attention.... Posted by: even(nik)
» RE: Obama... Posted by: bassman
» RE: Obama... Posted by: lafrance
» RE: Obama... Posted by: gjames
US Corporate media engages in usual spin practices over Iraq war positions
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 19, 2007 4:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As usual, it's bizzare to observe the spin the US corporate media puts on various news events - in this case, the response to the differing views on the war of John Edwards, Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama. They keep referring to Edwards as the 'left-of-center candidate' because he wants to bring the troops home.

On the other hand, take the British Guardian:
Blow to Clinton campaign as effort to win over Iraq critics falls short
"Failure to denounce war could cost her party vote"

Now the Washington Post:
Clinton Steps Up Criticism of War in Iraq
"Senator Rejects Bush Strategy but Steers Clear of Timetable for Troop Pullout"

Meanwhile, Barak Obama (along with Hillary Clinton) is proposing nothing more then "Caps" on the number of troops in Iraq; and has said nothing (that I could find) about the need to get out of Iraq entirely ASAP.

The NYT has one decent article on the situation at Democrats Are Unified in Opposition to Troop Increase, but Split Over What to Do About It, but notice the spin: "Democrats are SPLIT" - but then, the NYT and Judith Miller were among the chief cheerleaders for the war, printing the string of propaganda generated by Dick Cheney, James Woolsey and the Iraqi National Congress verbatim, no questions asked. They have a member of the Carlyle Group (Keenan) on their corporate board, so what do you expect?

Compare this to the British Guardian Most in Democratic Field Want Troop Cuts

"Edwards - who has labeled a troop increase the ``McCain doctrine'' in a jab at Republican front-runner John McCain - said Congress ``should make it clear to the president that he will not get any money to put more of our troops in harm's way until he provides a plan to turn responsibility of Iraq over to the Iraqi people and to ultimately leave Iraq.''"

Even though Obama initially opposed the war, while Edwards voted for it, at least Edwards has recognized that the Congress was fed lies about WMDs and the Saddam-911 connection - Obama should call for troop pullouts, but maybe he's worried about the corporate media response. Edwards looks like the only one who is honestly speaking his mind at this point.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Too early to pick candidates
Posted by: Dboy on Jan 19, 2007 4:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With everything that is at stake in the 2008 elections I think it's WAY too early to start zeroing in on somebody. There are many qualified candidates out there, several of which seem stronger to me than Obama or Hillary. Those two in particular would be DREAM candidates for the Republicans to run against. The republican could run almost anybody against Obama or Hillary and win 2008. They could run Jenna and win with a lineup like this.

Dboy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» 2004 Rove scared of Howard Dean Posted by: alternetleslie
PRESIDENT OBAMA and The Tom Bradley Syndrome
Posted by: deapp on Jan 19, 2007 5:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are many things involved here that we will never realize consciously. Like the Republican, illusion is reality and don't bother me with the truth. What is actually happening with this entire Obama hyper-activeness?
Most of the hoopla over Obama is coming from the White Liberal establishment. Even though the white conservative clan softly approved of him during the last Democratic convention speech, his acceptance among most American whites was euphoric. Most Blacks liked him but stood couscous, not knowing why he was liked so much by the White Left and Right. They thought it may have been something to do with being anti-black or something. Or, he was one of those who would not recognize the evils of the past to pacify White guilt (Clarence Thomas). More recognizable because of his split black/white racial mixture, Whites tended to lean towards him more because he is allot like us, so he will be slow to condemn us for our forefathers viscous past.
Such as the white thrill over Tiger Woods who identify mostly with his Caucasian side even though he is mostly Black and Asian. Halli Barry, who plays all sex scenes with white men, so they gave her an award for doing such a good job at it. Whites have a fascination and comfort level with the mulotto's ability to cross racial lines and not look too Black.
Obama has become Whites "White Hope" for America to finally deal with and put under the radar its racial divisions. Blacks are afraid and believe Whites would never put an intelligent, smart and problem solving Black man in office no matter how mulotto he/she is. Blacks believe it will turn into a situation similar to that in California with Tom Bradley or Andy Young in Georgia where the polls had them ahead and winning and every white person interviewed expressed their preference for them but strangely, they lost. This is called The Bradley Syndrome. Or murdered like so many of our black officials after winning in an all white jurisdiction has this year.
Many Blacks would love to see a Black Man/Woman voted into the highest office in America but believe White America rather put a dumb, ignorant, inarticulate white male (W. Bush) in office again before they put a smart, articulate, problem solving Black man like Obama in there. But there is White excitement like never before, even though the risk is great, this type of white arousal may never come again. First time since slavery a Black man has been considered by a large number of White people, for the highest office in the land, so we have to go with it praying for his protection and success.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Edwards and Clinton are just as vauge as everyone so not fair to single one out
Posted by: lafrance on Jan 19, 2007 5:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have not heard much from either candidate. Edwards makes noise and little more. What he does give in policy is just warmed over from others ideas.
Clinton has not come out about much of anything.
I think the complaint you make is something you should make about all of the candidates as they have not come out with much of anything. To single one out is not right when all are suffering from the same illness.
However, I do think this is because until the campaigns get going, no one is really going to detail their stuff much. Not until they get into the campaigning mode.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In answer to where's the beef, the same could be said of Edwards
Posted by: lafrance on Jan 19, 2007 5:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I haven't heard much but others warmed over ideas from Edwards. I have not heard anything new or original or detailed from him.
Obama has original ideas but, he shouldn't go into detail until he starts campaigning. Why give his ideas away. Some of what he's has said I've noticed Edwards has taken as his own.
None of the other candidates have given up much in ideas and policy yet. Not fair to just single one out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not My Vote
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jan 19, 2007 8:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He's a smart and well spoken man, but here is why I I'll not support him if he chooses to run:
1- Experience. Not even a full term as a Senator with no other national political experience.
2- Voting Record. What little track record I have seen makes him look like a DLC (Republican Lite on economic issues). No-Go.
3- Leadership. A good President has to be able to lead their party, build a team and build consensus. I do not see that anywhere on his resume.

Whoever gets elected in 2008 will have a very full plate of very time sensitive and politically charged issues to deal with. Cleaning up the mess that Dubya will have left behind is going to be more than a full time job and calls for an experienced politician with either a mandate or some extraordinary consensus building skills. There will be no room for OJT with an explosive SW Asia, mangled foreign policy, huge deficits and a better than 9 trillion & Federal debt. Taxes are going to have to go up, spending cut or a combination of the two. Selling that and negotiating who gets taxed, what gets cut and why calls for something more than a first term Senator.

Maybe in a decade or so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not My Vote Posted by: corky
Kucinich in 08
Posted by: antiapathy on Jan 19, 2007 8:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If I'm going to vote for a Democrat it has to be someone who makes a bold stance for peace and economic justice. The Democratic candidate is invariably a wishy-washy, center-leaning rhetoritician. And the Democratic candidate invariably loses a close race because nobody gets excited about him.

people who claim to be progressive should not be backing these middle of the road candidates. You can whine and bitch about how a progressive candidate like Kucinich is "not electable", but that is only true to the extent that you make it so.

So when Clinton/Obama lose to McCain or whoever, remember who warned you...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Kucinich in 08 Posted by: alternetrose
» Slime Comes In All Colors Posted by: edith
» RE: Kucinich in 08 Posted by: oregoncharles
Earth to alternet
Posted by: rwa on Jan 19, 2007 8:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can't you see nobody is interested in Obama? Why post article after article on this empty persona?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obamalamadingdong
Posted by: unitedstatesofstupidity on Jan 19, 2007 9:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why are people paying so much attention to Obama? Because every liberal voter in the country is desperate as hell for someone that's really worth voting for. Is that person Obama? Probably not. But it certainly isn't Kucinich. As much as I love Kucinich's positions and his courage to stand up for what counts, there's something that counts that he doesn't have: Charm. Without it you simply can't win the presidency. Whether Obama is worth paying attention to or not, he's got that magic magnetism. Bill Clinton had it too, and that's why he was able to win.

There are a lot of really fucking big problems in the world, and in the United States, that NEED to be fixed ASAP. The Middle East is a mess, Global Warming is fast approaching, our idiot president has made an enemy out of any sane and rational human being (and a lot of insane and irrational ones too), our education system is in total shambles, a bunch of neocon evangelists want to take over our country (if they haven't already), and what are we going to do about any of it?

Obama has that magic, that aura of something possible. Maybe he's just a do-nothing republicrat toadie, but maybe he's something more? Anyone who has heard the guy speak knows there's a chance something special is there. It's really too bad there isn't anyone with Obama's star power and appeal with the convictions of Kucinich out there. Then maybe I'd get my hope back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Obamalamadingdong Posted by: MartianBachelor
Thank you
Posted by: bjerko on Jan 19, 2007 9:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for making me aware that I'm not the only one who thinks this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He needs to quit smoking too
Posted by: xbj on Jan 19, 2007 10:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The very last thing the Democrats need is a President (not likely at all, which is why the media and the GOP AND Big Tobacco are pushing his celebrity so hard) or even a Vice-President (far more likely; even possible) that is a slave to Big Tobacco.

Not going to cut it. Not after 8 years of the tabacky-chewin' and spittin' wonder from Texas and his chainsmoking alien (as in E.T.) wife and Reptilian Administration.

Like it or not, nearly 90% of nonsmokers see smokers as suicide-killers, and the science unfortunately is backing that up. Making that formerly social pastime ANTI-SOCIAL. To the max.

And with the recent revelations of Big Tobacco spiking their poison with more additive poison and another future class action settlement surely ahead, HEY!!

Obama!!!

NOW IS THE TIME. Take a pill. Or patch. Or gum. Or all three.

Whatever it takes. Because it's the right thing to do.

And then have your crew MAKE A BIG DEAL ABOUT IT. Not you, them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He smokes??...smokes??..Will you Pulheeeez GettheFOuttaHere....
Posted by: ekipnrut on Jan 20, 2007 6:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is 2007...blacks and women are dropping like flies
due to stroke, emphysema, lung cancer, etc.
Bottom line on the coroner's toe tag: smoking
Question:
Is a man who can't even produce the will to quit
(smoking) AND act on it....the man who you want to carry
the nuke football with his pack of Marlboros?????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Joe Check
Posted by: Joecheck on Jan 20, 2007 6:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barack Obama was my state senator and is my senator and neighbor. I have been a supporter from the beginning and have read his books and met him. Have the audacity to hope. He can win and do well. I am impressed by his experience as a community organizer on Chicago's southside and by his ability to listen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh Please!!
Posted by: henderson on Jan 20, 2007 6:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't care if ANYONE uses cigarettes! I don't care what a person DOES, I care what he/she IS. His/her thoughts, morals, standards, integrity, ethics mean much more to me than his/her personal habits. To vote or not vote for someone based on their personal habits is so trite and cheap.

As far as blaming cigarettes on all kinds of deaths, where does that leave all the contaminants spewed out by industry that we breathe every day? Some of the coal-fired plants put out 95 TONS of contaminants every year. I don't believe cigarettes cause acid rain, or the paint to peel off cars, but industry does, and it's all blamed on cigarettes or cigars. Doesn't make sense to me at all.

Obama can smoke all he wants and it won't lower him in my estimation, but failing to use good common sense and failing to do the will of the people WILL cause me to dismiss him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oh Please!! Posted by: xbj
John WI
Posted by: JonA on Jan 20, 2007 7:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Give Obama reading room. He has more than enough time to offer his qualities and what he would like to do for our Country. Remember, he is the complete opposite of what we have had the past six years..... thank God!.... and I am not a reglious man! Just because he shows himself to greatness, don't expect him to answer all questions today. He has two years to weather and improve. Take a deep breath and support him to the fullest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lynne
Posted by: lynned2002 on Jan 20, 2007 8:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't you think it's a little early to say Obama lacks substance until he actually starts running? The fact that he is not a multi-millionaire shows that he at least is in touch with the middle class. His books are excellent. Take the time to read them if you want to see what he is about.

Let's remain open here folks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Barack Obama needs some spine
Posted by: Democritus on Jan 20, 2007 8:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We expect Hillary Clinton to waffle about the war. She's learned that art from a master at it. That's what will do her in for any run she makes at the presidency, no matter how much money she has, or how much the DLC loves her. Americans are tired of the waffling. They want their candidates to speak the truth to them, especially about getting out of Iraq.
Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi, have also been waffling. They tell us that they can't cut off funds for the war for fear of endangering our troops. This is a disingenuous argument, because there are already enough funds appropriated for Iraq that could be used to bring our troops home swiftly and safely. What Obama and Pelosi have done (especially since Pelosi has taken impeachment off the table) is to give President Bush two more years to wreak more havoc and destruction on Iraq and get more American troops killed.
Obama is an attractive candidate, but he needs the backbone to go along with his well-spoken ideas and his winning smile. So far, of all the major announced candidates, John Edwards is the only one who has put no conditions on removing our forces from Iraq. If Obama can show us that he's capable of taking principled stands, rather than playing the politician, he would be a worthy candidate. Otherwise, he will join Hillary in breakfasting at the Waffle House.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

clinker
Posted by: cottontail on Jan 20, 2007 10:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One wag said a successful candidate needs charisma and charm, both lacking in Dennis Kucinich. If that's true it's a sad commentary on the state of our politics. What in hell is charming or charismatic in George Bush? If folks found him charming they are as stupid and brainless as he is. It will take more than votes from this dumbed-down, celebrity-worshipping moron majority to save this Republic. Educate them? It's too late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I dig him, but....
Posted by: morticia on Jan 20, 2007 10:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
....just wait until the Limbaughs, Robertsons, Coulters, Savages et al get hold of the fact that his middle name is Hussein....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

marktar
Posted by: marktar on Jan 20, 2007 11:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NO DEPOSIT-NO RETURN Mr O's cherry picked seat in the Illinois statehouse,and now the senate have been filled with nothing.Can some hippy reporter re his voting record,number of sessions missed,bills written,sponsored,specific improvements made in his home district?Hey we got Big Bill Richardson,and the only way we might get a response out of him is if we were to become a province of Sudan or North Korea.Can't we pay these people to stay home and shut up?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Predictions
Posted by: leighsure on Jan 20, 2007 12:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At the end of the last Presidential election robbery I made a prediction (as I have done after every national election since 1972) that the Democratic ticket would be Edwards/Obama in 2008. I still think that's a good bet. If the Dems can't overcome the remnants of the DLC corporate mindset and then select Clinton, there's no hope, not even in Arkansas.
Let me be clear: I don't actually think that in a dream world that Edwards/Obama would be the best the Dems have to offer, just the most likely in this "real" world we live in. I personally would like to see a ticket of Russ Feingold and Eliot Spitzer. Not bloody likely, but more so than Dennis Kucinich, I'm sorry to say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No experience? No substance? Oh come ON!
Posted by: culprit on Jan 20, 2007 4:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gee, our last president (unfortunately still the current pres) had no more experience--Gov of Texas, owner of a football team? And is a moron. anybody with a modicum of intelligence can and SHOULD run for president. Blacks won't support him because whites do? Again, COME ON. African Americans will be ecstatic to have an African American president. Obama is a lawyer, at least he knows the law! Who would you prefer, HRClinton? Oh, yeah, she's pure....Limbaugh & the neocons would have a field day, and we'll end up with another 8 years of republican rule.

Yeah he's a "rock star" (figuratively speaking), that's why he can win. So shut up and dance for OBAMA '08!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the dancer
Posted by: deltadancer on Jan 20, 2007 5:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If I were to vote today, it would be for John Edwards. He has the the personality to be diplomatic. The Dancer

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama the Abominable
Posted by: Ann Garrison on Jan 20, 2007 10:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This thoroughly lazy, idiotic sentence confirmed what I'd begun to think of The Nation Magazine, which is, not much:

"To his credit, Obama recognized in his announcement many of the challenges . . . the need to break our dependence on foreign oil.

Anyone notice what the legislative outcome of Obama's concern about dependence on foreign oil has been? That was obviously too much work for this Nation writer, even though Obama introduced the legislation way back on January 4th, the day of the new House Peaker Plant's ascension.

This is Day 17 in the Year of Our Nancy; Obama introduced the Coal to Liquid Fuel Transportation Act on Day One. Dirty energy Nancy and Barrack Obama would make a most complementary ticket next year, every bit as horrible as Clinton-Richardson. --Ann Garrison

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bad news for Obama and his supporters
Posted by: dikaiosyne on Jan 21, 2007 3:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hate to break it to you all but this is just coming across the wire. Seems that Hillary's dirt diggers has discovered that the new "messiah" of left wing politics Obama was educated in an Indonesian madrassa till the age of fourteen according to the report I heard. You can bet that there will be a cover up, at least initially, by the left wing media but they will have to confront Barack "hussein" Obama on exactly what he was taught during his formative years and what he believes now. Much will depend on who the "imam" was who taught him and how extreme he was and may still be, and how Obama explains exactly why he hasn't revealed this sooner. You can't blame this one on the right wing. Its all about Hillary dealing with someone who could just stand between her and the white house. To me it looks like Obama's political career is all but officially O-V-E-R!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» So What??? Posted by: sofla100
Rhetoric
Posted by: oregoncharles on Jan 21, 2007 10:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barack Obama's celebrity status is based entirely on his speech-making, not an actual record of achievement. His votes in the Senate have been poor, at best, demonstrating that he's just as sold-out as most of the rest. And then, he's "Black," but not American black.

Trouble is, making good speeches no longer matters. Have any of you actually listened to W? Or his father before him? Inarticulate idiots, right there in front of everybody, but W even got re-elected - with a lot of help from Kerry. It doesn't matter any more, presumably something about the campaigns being TV programs. And the control of big money.

So he can actually speak in public; so what?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush's Wars.....become religious wars...
Posted by: picket on Jan 21, 2007 10:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Three major religions battle,..... Islam, Judaism and Christianity.
It is my understanding that the countries with the highest Muslim populations are Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India and Nigeria.[not Iraq and Iran].
Christian Zionist ministries that preach to Bush, like Hagee...about "Islamist fascists"are dangerous. Religious Wars will kill us all. Great for Big Brother though, religious wars will NEVER END and provide unlimited funds for the world's military industrial complex.
The main prophets in the Qur'an are Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. Others, although spelled differently, are Aaron, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Joseph, Job, Solomon, David, Jonah, John, Elijah. Ring a BEll???? The three religions are awaiting a Messiah. For Jews the first coming, for Christians the second coming and for Muslims, the Perfect Human Being promised to All.
Multitudes that identify with a particular group are in actuality, atheists. Go figure...ok, call it a Civil War.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophets_of_Islam

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama's corporate sponsors
Posted by: inclement on Jan 21, 2007 12:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am afraid we have to look to see who is funding this candidate and or any candidate. Oil corporate sponsors, is just like having another bush regime....

Obama already has the same top ten corporate sponsors that put bush in office....we have a real problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]