Posted on 07/27/2007 3:33:21 AM PDT by Kaslin
For Barack Obama, it was strike two. And this one was a right-down-the-middle question from a YouTuber in Monday night's South Carolina debate:
"Would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea?"
"I would," responded Obama.
His explanation dug him even deeper: "The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous."
From the Nation magazine's David Corn to superblogger Mickey Kaus, a near-audible gasp. For Hillary Clinton, next in line at the debate, an unmissable opportunity.
She pounced: "I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year." And she then proceeded to give the reasons any graduate student could tick off: You don't want to be used for their propaganda. You need to know their intentions. Such meetings can make the situation worse.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
I live about a mile from there. Hilarious.
Obama continues to show that he is politically immature. That is not a good quality for the presidency.
Obama makes statements based on feel-good-ism. That may appeal to the Oprah fans, but it isn’t the manner in which national and worldly problems should be addressed.
You posted, in part: I believe Charles operates on the assumption that Obama has no core beliefs, just an appetite for power.
***
And I agree with Krauthammer, not just as to Obama, but as to nearly every Democrat politician, and many GOP ones as well. For Democrats, politics is their religion, and that is why anything goes. The goal is getting elected and then, controlling others and taking their money through taxation and regulation. Their goal is NOT betterment of the country, although credit is taken in the rare occasion where democrat policies help the country.
IMO, this is why GOP politicians often appear weak— they are simply unwilling to betray their positions merely to get power. Yes, there are a number who don’t seem as bothered by this, but by and large Republicans appear (to me, at least) to believe what they say, and are not willing to contradict their beliefs only to get votes (they may try to “pretty up” their positions, however).
I don’t think Obama wants power. I think he wants perks, admiration, nice suits, big cars and parties.
I worry more about who would use Obama than about him.
Say no more.
Congressman Billybob
I tend to agree that Obama's "gaffe" has great appeal to the emotion driven "can't we all just get along" crowd.
It was said about Pres. Clinton that "soccer moms" believed he cared more about their children than their own husbands did. If anyone was the Oprah president, it was Clinton and if he were able to run again in 2008, I have little doubt he would be elected.
We seem to be in an age where "feel-good-ism" rules the day.
Hillary can wear all pink clothing all the time, but it still won't soften her persona. She is cold and calculating at heart.
Obama is attractive and appealing. I actually like him as a person, but his policies are all wrong for this country and he is not yet ready for prime time. But neither were Carter and Clinton, yet the Oprah crowd loved them.
“obama’s gaffe: can his party afford a third?”
the democrat party committs gaffe, after gaffe, after gaffe, after gaffe.....ad nauseum. yet it comes out of each smelling like a rose because of the propaganda tactics of the msm. (msm = propaganda organ of the international movement = the democrat party)
and the “american electorate” keeps taking the bait.
There, I fixed it...
We seem to be in an age where "feel-good-ism" rules the day.
Yes, we are in the advanced stages of transition to pure demogoguery, bread-and-circuses mob rule. It's been building for a long time. Increasing the percentage of the voter pool that pays no taxes (or even gets reverse-taxes, earned-income-credit handouts) to whatever the percentage is now (30%?? higher?) inevitably will lead to oligarchy and demagoguery. The Dhimmicrats have done nothing but demagogue for 30 years now--since Watergate. They have taken no initiative in any substantive policy matters over this time. Just look at the two or three big policy items coming out of Clinton's years (welfare reform, NAFTA)--they were Republican policy initiatives that he coopted when he saw he couldn't stop them. On other looming huge policy matters (Medicare reform, Social Security Reform etc.) the Dhimmis have actually blocked any policies that might solve problems because they'd rather have the problem to use for demagoguing purposes.
Obama is dangerous in this light. He is the ultimate demagogue, full of vacuuous platitudes, Oprah-come-home-to-roost.
It works negatively as well--intelligent, tough-love kinds of policy initiatives by grown ups who see what needs to be done and offer realistic but bite-the-bullet solutions (e.g., fighting Al Quaida overseas rather than here) cannot get their message across. Yes, the Bushies made some really horrendous mistakes in the aftermath of the 2003 Iraq invasion and yes, GWB may not try as hard as he should to get his message out. That's probably true. But we have to realize that when a culture shifts from responsible adults making critical, intelligent assessments of political choices to a culture of bread-and-circuses demagoguery, it becomes next to impossible to persuade with a message that requires tough, intelligent analysis to receive.
We started down this road more than 150 years ago by extending the franchise to non-property holders (the Jacksonian phase probably was sustainable, but universal male franchise in the later 1800s was probably foolish--they should have extended it to married women property owners before extending it to non property owners of either sex). Then the direct election of senators turned what was supposed to have been an adult, wise brake on mob-rule into a beauty contest that participates even more in the demagogic campaigning than do House elections today. And one could list a host of other changes to the original vision for the republic that have brought us to where we are.
But since none of these alterations are likely ever to be reversed, we are stuck on this road to mob-rule and demagoguery. At what point does one shift to the strategy of trying to find a benevolent Judaeo-Christian demagogue as the last hope to staunch the rising tide of death-dealing Leftist-Materialist-Technocrat demagogues and give up on the strategy of appealing to intelligent, analytical, critical voters?
“I worry more about who would use Obama than about him.”
ka-ching! Thou hast said it..
Obama’s arrogance has grown with his deification by the so-called MSM. I believe he has read his press clippings and views himself as a serious candidate. However, his lack of qualifications for the become clearer every day. He is an empty suit that has never run a corner grocery store, let alone an entity like the USA. He needs to go back to the Congressional plantation and actually earn his chance through hard work and experience.
Not that I have any truck for the likes of Hillary Clinton - as President she would be a clear and present danger to us all on the national security side; the ruination of the economy as she tries to nationalize 16% of the GDP (health care delivery); and would open the floodgates to a wholesale purge of what remains of non-deviant behavior by having her scumbag “husband” in the WH.
God, deliver the USA, please.
The only things missing from the “Bama Nut Shop” sign are “Beer” and “Gasoline”. You would have the “Southern Trifecta” for old boys. And, if you threw in “Guns”, well, Katy bar the door. Those places can be found along I-24 between Nashville and Chattanooga, so look out.
Well then, that's the point. He's obviously not politically astute enough to be President.
Ah, yes. A real slice of Americana. Remember them well. And it’s wonderful to hear that it still exists. Been stuck up here in WI for the last decade or so—the WI equivalent is taverns & cheese factories which are rather pale in color as compared to those little joints in the South.
Cool. Talk to the owners about adding Cashews & then I’ll be down to see ya’ll!
Excellent summary of particular events. Don’t forget the Clintons’ waffling and pretend-machoism in their approach to the terrorists. They were all rhetoric and a media creation.
Any conservative must fight the same forces who created the Clinton mirage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.