Obama's stuttering in debate...Why

[villaspurs 65]

What exactly do you mean by Palin paranoia? Her incredible lack of knowledge? Her laughable responses to legitimate questions about important political issues? Her offensive record as mayor of a small town and governor of a small state?

These are legitimate concerns, not paranoia

I mean that there is so little concern about Obama's lack of knowledge, his laughable responses to legitimate questions about important political issues, his thin resume, opportunist political career, and the inability to examine his past associations, comfort with fringe elements and activities without that discussion being diverted into criticism of Sarah Palin.

While there may be concerns about Obama's lack of experience (I disagree, but hey ho), I don't think his knowledge is at all in question. Likewise, Obama has never made a mockery of himself in an interview--you may not like what he has to say, but he is a capable speaker. I disagree with your concerns about his past associations and comfort with "fringe elements," but fine--you see things your way. You cannot pretend that Obama is ill-informed or unprepared, however.

Finally (and then I have to go to bed, as riveting as this discussion has been), look at your post above and reconsider who's being paranoid. I'm willing to talk about Obama's record, as are other people on here. But as soon as anyone questions Palin, we're paranoid Socialists. It's absurd. She is NOT A QUALIFIED CANDIDATE. Regardless of how you feel about Barack Obama, he was legitimately nominated through a democratic process. She was appointed to the ticket in an attempt to shake up the race, despite her total lack of preparedness.

Kathleen Parker, a National Review columnist and hard-core conservative, had an interesting piece on this:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiM...WMyYTUxZDkwNTE=

This is NOT coming from a Democrat or Socialist or liberal or whatever--this is from an avowed, respected conservative columnist. Palin is in over her head. Obama is not.

He was nominated for sure. He was nominated by a little more than half of the Dems that actually went to the polls. Do not mistake that as a fro sure win by the whole country. He has a lot going against him now. It is a huge fight on his hands. If it seems that Palin has to be attacked so viciously and taken down to win then guess what? You are going to lose.

Obama needs to get back and his sheep also to running a campaign. McCain is the one that y'all should be worried about. He just made Obama look dumb. McCain asked for the debate to be postponed to take care of something important in Washington. Obama people screamed that the debate was ON. Also McCain was scared. Then McCain promptly agreed to the debate and showed up at what looked last minute and proceeded to take command of the debate. Obama was Punked.

I am not blaming Obama for it all but his handlers he pays a huge amount of money to keep him on top. They blew this from him. From what I seen McCain was the master campaigner and Obama was the also ran. McCains experience wins again.

Fair enough if that was your interpretation, but it seems you are in the minority. Undecideds watching preferred Obama. Pundits thought it was a draw, but it's playing out in Obama's favor through today's news cycles (which in some ways matter more than the debate itself). It was by no means McCain "punking" Obama.

Also, where on earth did I say that Obama's nomination in the Democratic primary means I think he's a shoe-in to win? It was a tough primary that went on much longer than anyone would have anticipated--no one would interpret that as an automatic win in the general election. That's not even remotely related to the point I was making.

This is going to be a close election. There is a lot of time to go, and odds are good that an "October Surprise" will shake things up considerably. We cannot predict right now what will happen--no one can. We may not even be able to on election night--this one could go down to the wire once more. What I DO know is that Obama's handlers are doing fine. Thus far, it seems that popular perception of McCain's decision to go to Washington is that it was a political ploy designed to recalibrate the race--motivated by politics rather than a real need to affect change. Once he got there, he screwed things up and derailed what was close to being an agreed-upon plan. Obama rightly said that the public deserves a chance to hear both candidates. He did well. McCain did well. There are two more debates (and the eagerly anticipated VP debate as well) and weeks to go. Anything can happen.

[PlatyPius 5]

The reason why Sarah Palin is such a thorn in the side to liberals is that she is not THEIR idea of feminist and her life doesn't reflect THEIR idea of what a liberated women would be. They are not open to a variety of thought regarding the parameters of women's rights, including the right not to be a liberal feminist

No, it's because she's an idiot.

[villaspurs 65]

The reason why Sarah Palin is such a thorn in the side to liberals is that she is not THEIR idea of feminist and her life doesn't reflect THEIR idea of what a liberated women would be. They are not open to a variety of thought regarding the parameters of women's rights, including the right not to be a liberal feminist

No, it's because she's an idiot.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Really? Palin is not a model of how far woman have come? She was a mayor and Governor and now on the Republican ticket as a Vice President. This is pretty far I think. It was not long ago that a woman would never even be considered as a candidate for mayor. Now a woman on a big name party ticket is being considered such a threat to the other major party that she is being skewered to hopefully stem the tide being lost. Dammit. A woman is such a threat to a major ticket is not considered a big step forward?

No Palin is a huge plus right now. I would say that I am surprised she is able to withstand the vicious attacks but I know most woman are strong enough. Keep trying to take her down and if it backfires then I promise to not say I told you so.

I will try not to say it but probably will say I told you so.

Actually, Geraldine Ferraro did it 24 years ago.

Yes she did and I know that. It was huge then and rightfully so. She was as lackluster the the candidate that chose her that knew his limitations and hoped that woman would flock to him. That time the gambit failed so bad that no other candidate dared to try it. Until McCain.

Ferrara was no threat then and needed no attacking. Also if they had attacked her then Ferrara would have maybe gotten more coverage and maybe have been more of a splash and the outcome possibly different. No she was allowed to campaign and she proved lackluster.

Palin though is seen as a big threat and the attacks started even before her interview that all gleefully cite as her undoing. No she is hanging in there and because of the attacks she is getting stronger and more of a threat. Good job.

[IAMX 3,055]

Jesus..

Obama's "resume" is only thin to people who think you need to be over 70 to run -- oh wait, look, there's one! Isn't that convenient.

So where's your vote for Joe Biden or Robert Byrd? Byrd's 80, and has a hell of a lot more experience than McCain. Or Joe Biden, who's 66, and has ten more years of experience than McCain?

I doubt you'd ever admit that you're only saying these things because it favors the candidate you have an flaming slant toward, but regardless it sure is as obvious as day.

I don't believe I mentioned age, just experience. For me, it has to be theright kind of experience, and Obama is sorely lacking in the right kind of experience.

I doubt you'd ever admit that you're only defending Obama because he has a lot of faults to be defended against, but regardless, it sure is as obvious as day.

These "faults" are really stupid because people don't have many policies to attack Obama on. All I keep hearing about is pastor, pin lapel, stuttering in debate, ambiguous interpretations of "experience", and, of course, associations with someone who committed heinous acts well before he was even associated with Obama (an obvious way of suggesting Obama loves extremism without any substance).

Not much directly on his foreign policy, not much directly on his economic plans, not much on his plans for education or civil rights, things that actually matter. Any logical person who's sitting here on the outside of both parties watching is going to see that the Republican attacks (especially Republican sycophants) on Obama are entirely related to him personally, not him as a Senator.

Here's what I see:

Democrat: "Hey McCain's taxes would tax the poor more often"

Republican: "Well Obama once associated with an extremist well after these acts occurred (after the person served their time and is no longer associated with them)"

Democrat: "McCain would continue the Bush foreign policy"

Republican: "Obama has less experience than McCain"

Democrat: "Palin isn't sincere about women's rights and is no champion for women"

Republican: "Obama associated with a pastor who says 'goddamn America'!"

These arguments Republican supporters mostly put on here are horse sh!t, and it's obvious to anyone who has no clear slant toward one party in particular.

For one reason or another, you won't stick to arguments like Obama's ties to the credit industry. Or Obama's inability to, himself, compose useful legislation (luckytxn finally did today with my help) that actually went anywhere in the U.S. Senate, and hell, you guys are entirely ignoring the MOST relevant issue that could slam Obama, and that is his head firmly planted up corporate a$$, and his preference for amnesty to government-corporation collusion than protecting individual rights.

You know the reason why you're not, or at least not anymore? Because the same goes for McCain in all of those.

So really all that's left is going for personal digs on Obama. Hell, Republican sycophants are even quoting Michelle, like she would make White House decisions, like I'm sure she makes Senate decisions too.

I can't help but laugh at this stupidity, but also the a-hole part of me also just likes rubbing it in people's faces. I mean, if you're going to elect people who are going to screw the very country they represent, may as well give it to the people who are dumb enough to elect them.

Edited September 28, 2008 by SRVT

[spookyturtle 9,466]

The reason why Sarah Palin is such a thorn in the side to liberals is that she is not THEIR idea of feminist and her life doesn't reflect THEIR idea of what a liberated women would be. They are not open to a variety of thought regarding the parameters of women's rights, including the right not to be a liberal feminist

No, it's because she's an idiot.

And the pot calls the kettle black. She's running for VP and you're posting on a visa information forum. Yep, she's an idiot all right

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The reason why Sarah Palin is such a thorn in the side to liberals is that she is not THEIR idea of feminist and her life doesn't reflect THEIR idea of what a liberated women would be. They are not open to a variety of thought regarding the parameters of women's rights, including the right not to be a liberal feminist

No, it's because she's an idiot.

Obama is a bigger idiot, but to keep this discussion from derailing into ad hominums, we should fstick to more subtl ways to state the obvious.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I can't help but laugh at this stupidity, but also the a-hole part of me also just likes rubbing it in people's faces. I mean, if you're going to elect people who are going to screw the very country they represent, may as well give it to the people who are dumb enough to elect them.

Perhaps you can get more of your fellow superior intellects to vote to negate the votes of the rest of us dumb ones? Did you vote for Bush both times?

[luckytxn 2,265]

What exactly do you mean by Palin paranoia? Her incredible lack of knowledge? Her laughable responses to legitimate questions about important political issues? Her offensive record as mayor of a small town and governor of a small state?

These are legitimate concerns, not paranoia

I mean that there is so little concern about Obama's lack of knowledge, his laughable responses to legitimate questions about important political issues, his thin resume, opportunist political career, and the inability to examine his past associations, comfort with fringe elements and activities without that discussion being diverted into criticism of Sarah Palin.

While there may be concerns about Obama's lack of experience (I disagree, but hey ho), I don't think his knowledge is at all in question. Likewise, Obama has never made a mockery of himself in an interview--you may not like what he has to say, but he is a capable speaker. I disagree with your concerns about his past associations and comfort with "fringe elements," but fine--you see things your way. You cannot pretend that Obama is ill-informed or unprepared, however.

Finally (and then I have to go to bed, as riveting as this discussion has been), look at your post above and reconsider who's being paranoid. I'm willing to talk about Obama's record, as are other people on here. But as soon as anyone questions Palin, we're paranoid Socialists. It's absurd. She is NOT A QUALIFIED CANDIDATE. Regardless of how you feel about Barack Obama, he was legitimately nominated through a democratic process. She was appointed to the ticket in an attempt to shake up the race, despite her total lack of preparedness.

Kathleen Parker, a National Review columnist and hard-core conservative, had an interesting piece on this:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiM...WMyYTUxZDkwNTE=

This is NOT coming from a Democrat or Socialist or liberal or whatever--this is from an avowed, respected conservative columnist. Palin is in over her head. Obama is not.

He was nominated for sure. He was nominated by a little more than half of the Dems that actually went to the polls. Do not mistake that as a fro sure win by the whole country. He has a lot going against him now. It is a huge fight on his hands. If it seems that Palin has to be attacked so viciously and taken down to win then guess what? You are going to lose.

Obama needs to get back and his sheep also to running a campaign. McCain is the one that y'all should be worried about. He just made Obama look dumb. McCain asked for the debate to be postponed to take care of something important in Washington. Obama people screamed that the debate was ON. Also McCain was scared. Then McCain promptly agreed to the debate and showed up at what looked last minute and proceeded to take command of the debate. Obama was Punked.

I am not blaming Obama for it all but his handlers he pays a huge amount of money to keep him on top. They blew this from him. From what I seen McCain was the master campaigner and Obama was the also ran. McCains experience wins again.

Fair enough if that was your interpretation, but it seems you are in the minority. Undecideds watching preferred Obama. Pundits thought it was a draw, but it's playing out in Obama's favor through today's news cycles (which in some ways matter more than the debate itself). It was by no means McCain "punking" Obama.

Also, where on earth did I say that Obama's nomination in the Democratic primary means I think he's a shoe-in to win? It was a tough primary that went on much longer than anyone would have anticipated--no one would interpret that as an automatic win in the general election. That's not even remotely related to the point I was making.

This is going to be a close election. There is a lot of time to go, and odds are good that an "October Surprise" will shake things up considerably. We cannot predict right now what will happen--no one can. We may not even be able to on election night--this one could go down to the wire once more. What I DO know is that Obama's handlers are doing fine. Thus far, it seems that popular perception of McCain's decision to go to Washington is that it was a political ploy designed to recalibrate the race--motivated by politics rather than a real need to affect change. Once he got there, he screwed things up and derailed what was close to being an agreed-upon plan. Obama rightly said that the public deserves a chance to hear both candidates. He did well. McCain did well. There are two more debates (and the eagerly anticipated VP debate as well) and weeks to go. Anything can happen.

Please cite where the facts are that undecideds are going to Obama? The one thing I remember reading about undecideds was a couple weeks ago and that they were pretty much split. Also many were saying they were going to one of the independant parties.

I looked up the polls on the debate and as usual it was where the polls were published. If it was a Dem rag it was Obama and a Rep rag it was McCain. It seems you are an Obama sheep so I suspect that you watched or read Dem Rags. I can promise I can find a poll going either way by Google.

No McCain played the Washington thing and then come to the debate well. I been around a few elections and honestly, who did not see it happening. It was politics well played. Obama can recover and should. He has to be preparing as we speak. I am sure he and his handlers are watching to see if McCain tries to pull anything like that masterly stuff again.

[IAMX 3,055]

The reason why Sarah Palin is such a thorn in the side to liberals is that she is not THEIR idea of feminist and her life doesn't reflect THEIR idea of what a liberated women would be. They are not open to a variety of thought regarding the parameters of women's rights, including the right not to be a liberal feminist

No, it's because she's an idiot.

Obama is a bigger idiot, but to keep this discussion from derailing into ad hominums, we should fstick to more subtl ways to state the obvious.

If you're having drinks during this debate, you sure as ** better invite me.

[Hollis 0]

Make no mistake about it:

Senator Barack Obama is the ONLY qualified candidate to occupy The Office of Presidency (aka the White House). He has and continues to demonstrate his capabilities. His wealth of knoweledge surpasses his rival Senator John McCain who compliments old schoold tactics and failed policies. Senator Barack Obama reminds the American nation day by day that he's willing to accept this leadership position ONLY if the citizens of America wll allow him - hence voting DEMOCRATIC. I am stongly advising every mis-informed McCain grassroot supporters to do their homework. !!

"Knoweledge is Power" -- figure it out !!!!!

[PlatyPius 5]

The reason why Sarah Palin is such a thorn in the side to liberals is that she is not THEIR idea of feminist and her life doesn't reflect THEIR idea of what a liberated women would be. They are not open to a variety of thought regarding the parameters of women's rights, including the right not to be a liberal feminist

No, it's because she's an idiot.

And the pot calls the kettle black. She's running for VP and you're posting on a visa information forum. Yep, she's an idiot all right

Oh, you wound me with your intelligent comment!

I live next to Illinois. I do not that think that, since I live next to Illinois, I have some kind of grasp on Illinois politics. Nor do I make statements that I can't back up and have to say "Let me check on that, and I'll get back to ya."

Still.... you are ALSO posting on an internet forum. I guess that makes you an idiot as well, does it not - by your reasoning?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The ability to defend Obama is waning, so the daggers are coming out. First, "what does his life before the Senate matter?", then "what about Palin?", then "Palin is an idiot", now it's "everyone against Obama is stupid".

Typical. Yea, libs, you're not fooling anybody.

These "faults" are really stupid because people don't have many policies to attack Obama on. All I keep hearing about is pastor, pin lapel, stuttering in debate, ambiguous interpretations of "experience", and, of course, associations with someone who committed heinous acts well before he was even associated with Obama (an obvious way of suggesting Obama loves extremism without any substance).

His adult life prior to becoming a US Senator IS his record, and it ain't pretty. He doesn't even talk about it much because there's not much to talk about UNLESS you talk about his racial issues, lack of selectivity of friends and acquaintances and his comfort level among the leftist fringe. Otherwise, he is a man campaigning on promises he cannot keep, and an empty vessel embracing whatever dream liberals want him to reflect. Obama is not who he is, he is only what you want him to be.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Jesus..

Obama's "resume" is only thin to people who think you need to be over 70 to run -- oh wait, look, there's one! Isn't that convenient.

So where's your vote for Joe Biden or Robert Byrd? Byrd's 80, and has a hell of a lot more experience than McCain. Or Joe Biden, who's 66, and has ten more years of experience than McCain?

I doubt you'd ever admit that you're only saying these things because it favors the candidate you have an flaming slant toward, but regardless it sure is as obvious as day.

I don't believe I mentioned age, just experience. For me, it has to be theright kind of experience, and Obama is sorely lacking in the right kind of experience.

I doubt you'd ever admit that you're only defending Obama because he has a lot of faults to be defended against, but regardless, it sure is as obvious as day.

These "faults" are really stupid because people don't have many policies to attack Obama on. All I keep hearing about is pastor, pin lapel, stuttering in debate, ambiguous interpretations of "experience", and, of course, associations with someone who committed heinous acts well before he was even associated with Obama (an obvious way of suggesting Obama loves extremism without any substance).

Not much directly on his foreign policy, not much directly on his economic plans, not much on his plans for education or civil rights, things that actually matter. Any logical person who's sitting here on the outside of both parties watching is going to see that the Republican attacks (especially Republican sycophants) on Obama are entirely related to him personally, not him as a Senator.

Here's what I see:

Democrat: "Hey McCain's taxes would tax the poor more often"

Republican: "Well Obama once associated with an extremist well after these acts occurred (after the person served their time and is no longer associated with them)"

Democrat: "McCain would continue the Bush foreign policy"

Republican: "Obama has less experience than McCain"

Democrat: "Palin isn't sincere about women's rights and is no champion for women"

Republican: "Obama associated with a pastor who says 'goddamn America'!"

These arguments Republican supporters mostly put on here are horse sh!t, and it's obvious to anyone who has no clear slant toward one party in particular.

For one reason or another, you won't stick to arguments like Obama's ties to the credit industry. Or Obama's inability to, himself, compose useful legislation (luckytxn finally did today with my help) that actually went anywhere in the U.S. Senate, and hell, you guys are entirely ignoring the MOST relevant issue that could slam Obama, and that is his head firmly planted up corporate a$$, and his preference for amnesty to government-corporation collusion than protecting individual rights.

You know the reason why you're not, or at least not anymore? Because the same goes for McCain in all of those.

So really all that's left is going for personal digs on Obama. Hell, Republican sycophants are even quoting Michelle, like she would make White House decisions, like I'm sure she makes Senate decisions too.

I can't help but laugh at this stupidity, but also the a-hole part of me also just likes rubbing it in people's faces. I mean, if you're going to elect people who are going to screw the very country they represent, may as well give it to the people who are dumb enough to elect them.

I am shaking my head too. Both these candidates are taking the sheep for a ride.

I will add two more to the ones you posted.

Obama is doing what Clinton did sucessfully. He is campaigning to the center and right and then veer to the far left if elected.

McCain is a RINO.

Personally to me both these candidates stink to H*ll. The one I wanted had no chance in H*ll. I have no idea why I even participate in politics because I am alwasy stabbed in the back after the elections is over. I guess it is because since a wee lad I have been in this #######.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

The reason why Sarah Palin is such a thorn in the side to liberals is that she is not THEIR idea of feminist and her life doesn't reflect THEIR idea of what a liberated women would be. They are not open to a variety of thought regarding the parameters of women's rights, including the right not to be a liberal feminist

No, it's because she's an idiot.

And the pot calls the kettle black. She's running for VP and you're posting on a visa information forum. Yep, she's an idiot all right

Oh, you wound me with your intelligent comment!

I live next to Illinois. I do not that think that, since I live next to Illinois, I have some kind of grasp on Illinois politics. Nor do I make statements that I can't back up and have to say "Let me check on that, and I'll get back to ya."

Still.... you are ALSO posting on an internet forum. I guess that makes you an idiot as well, does it not - by your reasoning?

I rest my case.