View Story | 552 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
by scanman1722 on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 06:42:39 AM PDT
That is a great interview.
by terrapin station84 on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 07:01:04 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
'cause you know that the others are going to weigh in.
I think Obama will make a great VP (for Edwards) for 8 years and then a great President. :)
Happy little moron, Lucky little man.I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!-Spike Milligan
by polecat on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 07:46:32 AM PDT
by ronlib on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 10:47:51 AM PDT
Obama winning the general election is that he has the independent/moderate voters in my Tampa Bay area, including my National Guard SSG son and his military/local friends. Obama has been right about every issue that he has brought up about the Middle East and our "ruined" military grunts that have served in Afghanistan and Iraq support him! Romney and his five, chickenhawk "Winnebego-serving sons" can go to hell, along with their corrupt, chickenhawk, GOP supporting cast!
I trust Barack Obama.
by mjd in florida on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 08:20:54 AM PDT
(We Floridians stick together.)
by pamelabrown on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 09:32:37 AM PDT
without good judgment. This is what I have been telling my friends. And there is something special about Obama that I just don't see in the other candidates. He is believable - I trust him.
I am glad that he is finally coming out of his shell and stressing his judgment. It is a winning strategy.
I saw Hillary at the breakout session at YKos and although I liked her I still think Obama would make a good if not a great president.
"Change is . . . renewing our commitment to science and innovation." Barack Obama 6-3-08
by LynChi on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 08:29:56 AM PDT
to choose Obama as VP running mate?
Dems will not hold impeachment hearings while Bill is campaigning with Hillary.
by annefrank on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 09:10:57 AM PDT
In my perfect world, I would like to see Obama as president and Hillary as majority leader of the Senate. I think she would be great in that position. Harry Reid has been good, but he just isn't as articulate as Hillary is. Hillary is smart and could easily handle that position, IMHO.
by LynChi on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 09:38:28 AM PDT
... and Obama as a Senate back-bencher, having disparaged the experience and conventional wisdom of his colleagues, having claimed judgmental superiority in a club of ponderous egos, having staked out eccentric positions on serious subjects, and having emerged with nothing to show for it.
Unfortunate choice of timing and tactics by Obama and his advisors.
The Great Obama might saw the lady in half, but he won't make the elephant disappear. The Confluence
by RonK Seattle on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 09:54:54 AM PDT
at their voting records. What do you say about a candidate who sponsors anti-flagburning legislation? How about the candidates that vote for war then try to explain away their craven reasons for doing so. (And yes, their votes were craven because UN inspectors were on the ground telling everyone there were no weapons of mass destruction and begging to let them proceed with their investigation.) Just how eccentric is it to say that we need to talk to our opponents and enemies? Has not talking to them been a better policy? Is it eccentric to say that we'll go after anyone who kills our people no matter where they are? (By the way, that's supposedly our current official policy.)
Conventional wisdom sure has served us well for the past six years hasn't it? (snark)
A vote for John McCain is a vote for war.
by Involuntary Exile on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 10:34:19 AM PDT
And it leaves the impression Obama - and his campaign - are lacking in common sense.
It's a self-inflicted campaign disaster.
by RonK Seattle on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 11:07:13 AM PDT
"We aren't looking for charity. We are looking for justice. The journey of equality moves on."
by CarolJ on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 02:35:13 PM PDT
But you know something he woke up too late. He should have mentioned the scandalous Clintons months ago. Why the wait? This should have been the theme in April. Maybe it's too late to build the narrative now.
"It's a race to decide who the British goverment will follow blindly for the next 4 years" Kennedy/Kerry '08
by Salo on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 08:34:21 AM PDT
this race is just starting, and the public will be paying close attention, this fall.
This Week With Barack Obama. Because you need to stay informed.
by icebergslim on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 09:18:42 AM PDT
he had to have her smack him first.
Confucius say: Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves.
by bluecayuga on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 09:22:46 AM PDT
White woman over 50 for OBAMA!! (Endorsed 6/07)
by nolalily on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 09:44:28 AM PDT
strategy. I think it is good strategy. Politics is so much like poker, and what great poker player lays their hand on the table face up as the cards are being dealt?
If you have a Republican Sec. of State start a voter registration certification drive in your area. Reverse the purge.
by Blogvirgin on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 10:31:06 AM PDT
is that it is ONLY August. I think Obama would have kept silent longer except for the condensed calendar. The same way HRC would have postponed announcing if she could have.
by CeeusBeeus on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 11:00:44 AM PDT
I believe Obama has a long term strategy that he is unfolding on his own schedule. This is a highly intelligent individual who has vision, integrity, and excellent judgement. He has been planning this candidacy for a long time, and the success and quality of his campaign thus far reflects this. He is just starting to build his momentum by becoming more specific and forceful with his message. He knows that this is a long race, and in order to win he must choose the time and place of his battles wisely.
I like many of the dem candidates, but Obama is the one that I trust. The one that can be depended on to look out for the public interest. The one who will restore the Constitution to its rightful status.
by CarolJ on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 02:48:39 PM PDT
It is ridiculous that Democrats would bring them back just to stick a finger in someone's eye. Obama or Edwards would actually accomplish something but very few Republicans will anger their voters by helping Hillary Clinton.
by Lois on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 10:51:27 AM PDT
This is still all inside baseball right now, plenty of time to make a serious midcourse correction.
The real PUBLIC ballgame has not even begun yet.
by gopher747 on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 12:43:38 PM PDT
People are starting to see this. How can you tout great experience when you voted for the worst national security disaster in this country's history? Look what all that "experience" have gotten us? Iraq War, disaster. Afghanistan, out of control. Views of the United States, poor internationally. Borrowing money from China, at an alarming rate. Incompetence, from top to bottom.
Judgment, NONE.
by icebergslim on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 09:17:32 AM PDT
Barack's timing is perfect. Hillary's surge (hate that word) to a 20 point lead likely made voters and Dem consultants think. Yikes, what are we really doing?
Dem fears?
"We have been told we cannot do this by a chorus of cynics that will only grow louder and more disciplined." Barack Obama
by speck tater on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 09:51:42 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 552 comments