But could he deliver?
 

I read this article in hard copy and thought it was very much to the point.

I also listened to a sound bite from a speech he made in WI. That of course got me all spun up as he spoke of how "they" needed to raise and educate my child. No! Mr Senator from a broken family and no children of his own, you are NOT going to raise my child, what in your bizarre fanatasies makes you believe you are in the least bit qualified to do anything other than make empty promises to sheeple?

They should run a Mastercard commercial for this cat...and see what the pricetag is.

Unfortunately the people who should look at this will never see it. The MSM is starting to treat this guy like Britney Spears or Oprah. He's a rock star.

Folks, this is the time to get the vote out. That whole "Anybody but_________", I think that may apply.

The hangover from this party could last a very very long time.


But could he deliver?
Feb 14th 2008
From The Economist print edition


It is time for America to evaluate Obama the potential president, not Obama the phenomenon

THIS has been an extraordinary week for the man who could become America's first black president. Barack Obama has now won all eight of the primaries and caucuses held since Super Tuesday on February 5th, which ended, more or less, in a dead heat with Hillary Clinton. He has won by much larger margins than most people expected, trouncing his rival not just in heavily black states, such as Louisiana, but in ones that are almost completely white, such as Maine. On February 12th he took all three prizes in the “Potomac primary”—Washington, DC, Maryland and, by a socking 29-point margin, Virginia.

Mr Obama now has more pledged delegates than his rival—and he is likely to remain the front-runner for at least another three weeks (see article). Revealingly, Mrs Clinton made her Virginian concession speech from Texas—a state which votes alongside Ohio on March 4th and is already being billed as her last stand. Mr Obama is raising money at the rate of $1m a day, twice as fast as she is; indeed, she has been forced to lend her campaign $5m of her own cash and fire the two people who run her campaign (although her husband has a big say).

Whatever happens, Mr Obama is already that rare thing—a political phenomenon. It is not just that he has managed to survive the Clintons' crude onslaught with grace. He has persuaded huge numbers of people around the world to reconsider politics in an optimistic way. To many Americans, a black man who eschews both racial politics and the conservative-liberal divide is a chance to heal the country's two deepest divisions. To many foreigners, he represents an idealistic version of America—the hope of a more benevolent superpower. Although Mr Obama's slogan “Yes We Can” has been turned into a pop video, the theme of his campaign echoes the Clintons' old tune—“Don't stop thinking about tomorrow”.

Optimism is a powerful emotion, but as that song warned, “tomorrow will soon be here.” That is why the real questioning of Mr Obama should begin now. With the brief exception of those four heady days after the Iowa caucuses, he has never been a front-runner; now he will be more fully scrutinised. The immediate focus will be on the horse race: can he win? But the bigger issue, which has so far occupied too little attention, is this: what would a President Obama, as opposed to Phenomenon Obama, really mean for America and the world?

Yes, you can; but not immediately
Begin with the horse race. Mrs Clinton is in a bad way—and deservedly so. The Clintons have fought a leaden and nasty campaign; at present, the prospect of a “Billary presidency” (even before you take into account the dynastic Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton aspect) is hardly enthralling. But Mrs Clinton is tough and smart, and now her rival will be under the media microscope. In debates she trumps Mr Obama on mastery of detail—and the race could well be a long, grinding one, perhaps decided in the end by the 796 “super delegates” from the Democratic Party's establishment. These people have tended to be loyal to the Clintons—though many might defect if polls still showed Mr Obama doing better against John McCain.

Mr McCain, whose lock on the Republican nomination looks stronger than ever following his own triple victory in the Potomac primary, is another part of tomorrow Mr Obama's euphoric supporters might think about. The Republicans are a mess, and the elderly Arizonan senator has plainly failed to stir up his party's supporters in the same way as either of the main Democrats. But Mr McCain is a brave man, with huge experience of international affairs and a much longer record of reaching out to his opponents in politics. Why should independent voters, who have often backed Mr McCain in the past, turn to the less proven man?

Of magnets and magic dust
That question is partly answered by Obama the phenomenon. His immediate effect on international relations could be dramatic: a black president, partly brought up in a Muslim country, would transform America's image. And his youthful optimism could work at home too. After the bitterness of the Bush years, America needs a dose of unity: Mr Obama has a rare ability to deliver it. And the power of charisma should not be underrated, especially in the context of the American presidency which is, constitutionally, quite a weak office. The best presidents are like magnets below a piece of paper, invisibly aligning iron filings into a new pattern of their making. Anyone can get experts to produce policy papers. The trick is to forge consensus to get those policies enacted.

But what policies exactly? Mr Obama's voting record in the Senate is one of the most left-wing of any Democrat. Even if he never voted for the Iraq war, his policy for dealing with that country now seems to amount to little more than pulling out quickly, convening a peace conference, inviting the Iranians and the Syrians along and hoping for the best. On the economy, his plans are more thought out, but he often tells people only that they deserve more money and more opportunities. If one lesson from the wasted Bush years is that needless division is bad, another is that incompetence is perhaps even worse. A man who has never run any public body of any note is a risk, even if his campaign has been a model of discipline.

And the Obama phenomenon would not always be helpful, because it would raise expectations to undue heights. Budgets do not magically cut themselves, even if both parties are in awe of the president; the Middle East will not heal, just because a president's second name is Hussein. Choices will have to be made—and foes created even when there is no intention to do so. Indeed, something like that has already happened in his campaign. The post-racial candidate has ended up relying heavily on black votes (and in some places even highlighting the divide between Latinos and blacks).

None of this is to take away from Mr Obama's achievement—or to imply that he could not rise to the challenges of the job in hand. But there is a sense in which he has hitherto had to jump over a lower bar than his main rivals have. For America's sake (and the world's), that bar should now be raised—or all kinds of brutal disappointment could follow.

As an American citizen, Obama scares me a little. He really does not seem to understand capitalism, the US Constitution, economics/how wealth is created ( I won't even start on defense/foreign policy) or even the actual role of the President in the US Govt. As far as healing the liberal/conservative divide in this country........I don't want that because liberal policy (IMHO) has done one hell of allot of damage to our country.

The really scary part about this guy is it seems like people for lack of a better word "swoon" at this guys feet. Women faint at his rallies, even my lesiban, vegen, animal rights activist cousion acts like he is the man of her dreams. Few of his supporters get past the retrhoic about "hope". I suppose he is the new "Messiah" of the left who can do no wrong for the time being. Though at some point they will be tremoundously disappointed. I suspect he is more the 21st Century version of Jimmy Carter than JFK. While I'm not a fan of Sen McCain I hope he can torpedo the Obama campaign.

Is the spell checker down?:D

TR

I have been down with the flu. Afraid I'm not at my best today.

It will be interesting over the next few days to see how the Clinton machine deals with Obama. Typically the Clinton machine destroys foes and, with Mrs. C against the wall, I expect things to become really nasty. I'll bet they'll begin the attack and present enough data for McCain to finish the job before the general election.:munchin

RF 1

With respect, I believe that he does understand capitalism, and the economy, but I think he sometimes tries to mask his socialist intentions, and in doing so he sounds inept.

For example, in last night's speech in Houston, he said that believed in a free market, but that when a CEO makes in 10 minutes what a worker does in a year (paraphrase), that there is a problem and that needs to change.

That doesn't sound like a free market to me.

I think he is trying to channel some of the intent of JFK, without the substance to back it up (examples are serving your country/community). Worse, he is trying to mix that intent with his socialist agenda, and too many of his supporters don't see past the platitudes to the worker's paradise he wants to create...or the grave damage that it would do to this country.

I have read through a couple of political analysts writings and some politico blogs and they note how stymied the Klintons are with O'bummer.
The standard attacks don't work. She has always had the fallback of being a woman, so she never looked like she was being prejudiced or mean spirited...now they are stuck. If the Klinton camp mounts a frontal assault trying to discredit O'bummer then they will appear to be racist or desparate, or both. Bill has been pulled off the road....(how dare you question the Senator!) and if they don't pull a rabbit out of the hat in Ohio or TX it is the end of the line.
Apparently the O'bummer Kool-aide is more powerful than the Klinton flavor

On the one hand I love how the Dims are being torn apart by the political correctness that they have forced on everyone..... The rest of us deal with it every day. If someone is wrong, depending upon their race, gender, political affiliation, religion or sexual orientation...you may or may not be able to say that they are wrong without being labeled a bigot or some other such thing.


The question is, which of the two scares you more?

1. Hillary?

2. Barack Hussein?

Jimma and Obama
 

[QUOTE=504PIR;200282] I suspect he is more the 21st Century version of Jimmy Carter than JFK.... /QUOTE]

I have drawn some similar comparisons lately. When Jimma Caatta ran the first time many young people in this country were hungry for a politician to give them something. For some it was as simple as relaxing the dope laws, but most of them saw Liberalism as the answer to their problems. Within four years, reality had set in. Pol Pot had killed millions, our Embassy had been seized, and our economy was in shambles. Jimma was beside himself. None of the feel good rhetoric of his campaign was working anymore. Even the mighty Allman Brothers and the other Southern rockers who stood by Jimma where feeling the pressure of years of substance abuse. The Left Wing of the Democrat party was firmly in control and the very core of our culture was paying the price.

I think our country is stronger today than it was then (notice I didn't say SMARTER), and my hope is that we will weather another Jimma Caatta type era. What price will we pay four years from now?

That one is easy. We have already lived threw 8 years of Clinton and know exactly what her administration would look like. While it was an unpleasant experience we know what we are going to end up with and we could survive it. Obama on the other hand offers only empty platitudes. Who knows what is going on upstairs with that guy. I will go with the devil I know over the devil that I don't.

Obama scares the crap out of me not only policy wise but his sheer inexperience. He has only been a member of the US Senate for three years and is no where near ready to become President. The ironic thing is that when President Bush ran in 2000 the Democrats made a big deal out of the fact that he was inexperienced with only 8 years of public service as Governor under his belt. I wonder where the concern for inexperience has gone now that Barack Obama is poised to be his parties nominee?

When Obama burst on the scene, Teddy Kennedy ,between drinks, called Obama, Usama Obama. Now he and other Kennedys are in bed with Obama.

RF 1

Who scares me more? The one who is the most likely to beat McCain, that's who. My gut tells me that person is Hillary. Today we're a LONG WAY from November. More and more I like McCain's chances against either candidate. Obama has no record of accomplishment - none, zippo, nada. McCain needs to focus on that like a laser - bang, bang, bang - drill it home. IMO, speeches won't do it down the stretch for Obama.

To be perfectly frank, Obama's inner city reverund-like sing-song speech style gives me the creeps. Rhyming in cadence, while repeating banal phrases doesn't give me any sort of confidence - It has the opposite effect. What disgusts me even more than Obama and his speeches making women swoon, is seeing folks falling all over themselves for the guy while thinking that his speeches are an indication of leadership and substance.

Wasn't there a German guy in the 30s that could talk up a storm and drive folks crazy?


Three Soldier Dad...Chuck


.

There was this Italian guy once....he promised to make the trains run on time....

A blast from the past
 

"speeches are an indication of leadership and substance. "

Wasn't there a German guy in the 30s that could talk up a storm and drive folks crazy?


Three Soldier Dad...Chuck


.[/QUOTE]

As I read through the post here I couldn't help but think just as you have when I got to your last line in your post. I am not saying Obama is the "Fuhrer" but the ability to unite a people based on a promise systematic change sound familiar to me as well. Hitler's reputation as an orator grew and it soon became clear that he was the main reason why people were joining the party. This gave Hitler tremendous power within the organization as they knew they could not afford to lose him.

Hitler's aim was to create an air of mystery about himself, hoping that it would encourage others to come and hear the man who was now being described as "the new Messiah".

Or Antichrist. :munchin

This sounds like BS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjZmA4YXFNo

Any comments from the experts?