Obama's speech in Berlin - Page 8 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Steve · #**106** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey_Left

Interesting.

And quite true.

Which is why it's absolutely fucking retarded for anyone to try to make the case that Obama has a wealth of foreign policy experience while McCain has little...

mudwhistle · #**107** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by goober

It's because he's a leader, they can see that, and there has been a terrible void in the world for the last 7 1/2 years, in the world leadership role that the US president used to fill.

Unless of course the US electorate decides it's about time someone gave McCain a chance to show if he had leadership skills, so far, uhhhhh, no, but who knows oftentimes it takes 75 years for a person's real abilities to come out..........

You may feel the world loves Obama.....but let me assure you they don't.

The media forgot to tell us that they were chanting....

"Jerusalem is not for sale Obama" in Israel.

Just a little tidbit the fawning press neglected to illuminate.

Not to mention the mixed reception he got in Berlin.

They weren't screaming at every syllable like they usually do.

solletica · #**108** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey_Left

Interesting. Your personal character editorials aside.

Experience is a funny thing to try to measure. I could probably make a decent argument that I have more foreign policy experience than a fair few congress critters.

Just like Steve, I have foreign policy experience, too. When I was 7, I colored all the countries in Asia w/crayons in a geography coloring book.

(although it's possible McCain could do that too. . .

)

solletica · #**109** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

And quite true.

Which is why it's absolutely fucking retarded for anyone to try to make the case that Obama has a wealth of foreign policy experience while McCain has little...

Absolutely. The truth is that McCain has none.

mudwhistle · #**110** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by solletica

Absolutely. The truth is that McCain has none.

I think he has common-sense and quite a bit more honesty.

I think he can learn the rest.

Truth is when you're at war I think the best character trait a President should have is the willingness to let the military do it's job and an ability to restrain Congress.

Oh and having core-values and beliefs that put America first rather trying to keep everyone happy that hates our guts.

goober · #**111** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by mudwhistle

You may feel the world loves Obama.....but let me assure you they don't.

The media forgot to tell us that they were chanting....

"Jerusalem is not for sale Obama" in Israel.

Just a little tidbit the fawning press neglected to illuminate.

Not to mention the mixed reception he got in Berlin.

They weren't screaming at every syllable like they usually do.

I read he was interrupted by applause 30 times, and only 200,000 people showed up, less than half of the number Kennedy spoke to and only ten times as many as showed up to see Reagan. While at the same time, McCain was able to finish his Bratwurst Plate at Schmidt's Sausage Haus, and he only got interrupted once, when the waitress asked if everything was OK..............

Oreo · #**112** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Obama is capable of delivering magnificent speeches, that are read from a tele-prompter. However, when he answers off-the-cuff questions, he stutters a little, pauses & acts like a normal human being. Which is at times, not confident of his answers, etc. This is quite normal for every politican. What concerns me is this Obama mania -- resulting from these magnificent speeches. After elected, & sitting in the oval office, Presidents really do not give speeches often, with the exception of once a year at the state of the Union address.

So in time, this fascination with Obama will lower. Presidents make decisions--& he is going to need semi-truck loads of experienced people guiding him in the right direction. Unfortunately as always there will be disapointment in campaign promises, simply because congress & the senate need to agree & vote on policy changes.

In my personal opinion, it's going to be a very different story once Obama becomes President. Once Obama is President the fairy tale ends.

Oreo · #**113** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by goober

I read he was interrupted by applause 30 times, and only 200,000 people showed up, less than half of the number Kennedy spoke to and only ten times as many as showed up to see Reagan. While at the same time, McCain was able to finish his Bratwurst Plate at Schmidt's Sausage Haus, and he only got interrupted once, when the waitress asked if everything was OK..............

There is absolutely no enthusiasm over McCain. I am still baffeled by his nomination in the first place. There were so many other candidates to choose from, & McCain gets it?

No worry, Obama has this race in the bag, unless more skeletons jump out of the closet. In other words it's his to lose.

The only way McCain has a snow-balls chance of winning this election, is if he chooses Hillary Clinton as his VP.

SomeMarine · #**114** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by solletica

The speech completely sucked, IMHO. His appearance in Germany provided him an opportunity to paint himself once and for all as an American leader with a thoughtful foreign policy in contrast to the childish good-and-evil jibberish that's been used to justify US global interventions for so many years,

but instead of seizing that opportunity--something one gets when he/she is engaging a much more educated audience, i. e. Germans, he instead tossed a tired set of pro-American, pro-Western platitudes ripe w/themes about unity, WWII, the Wall, etc.

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that's not exactly what Germans wanted to hear from Obama. They wanted to hear an American pol who could rise up and for the first time berate his own country--the USA for its past childish misbehavior and prove the USA could lead with its head.

The Germans wanted a Doppelbock, and Obama gave them Budweiser.

Who gives a fuck what the Germans want?

Rakkasan · #**115** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulj

Obama is such a tool

so it's ok to give a photo op speech to foreigners, but "inappropriate" to visit your own country's wounded soldiers? Wow.

his excuse was he didnt want to spend campaign money on a trip to visit troops

which to me makes it even worse

chassisman · #**116** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rakkasan

his excuse was he didnt want to spend campaign money on a trip to visit troops

which to me makes it even worse

Rak, he knew the brave men that willingly went to fight in Iraq would want to smear model car glue all over him, set it on fire, and laugh like hell at the scramble.

TSGracchus · #**117** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rakkasan

his excuse was he didnt want to spend campaign money on a trip to visit troops

[scorn]

No, it wasn't:

Quote:

A campaign adviser said the U.S. military saw the visit as a campaign stop.

"We learned from the Pentagon last night that the visit would be viewed instead as a campaign event," the adviser, retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Scott Gration, said in a statement. "Senator Obama did not want to have a trip to see our wounded warriors perveived as a campaign event when his visit was to show his appreciation for our troops and decided instead not to go."

Come on, at least make SOME attempt to get your facts right.

sahara · #**118** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by drgoodtrips

That's an interesting comparison, and one likely to piss off partisans on both sides of the aisle

Though, I don't personally find Bush and Obama particularly comparable as candidates. Bush is an ineloquent public speaker even when reading from cue cards, and Obama is not (though apparently not great off the cuff, he can give a decent speech). Though we haven't seen the general election yet, I will venture a guess that Bush's campaign was significantly more ruthless, low-brow, and effective than Obama's will be. Generally speaking, Bush's message is a fear of consequences of what will happen unless he's in charge whereas Obama's is more in the vein of lofty (and quite possibly vague or unfulfillable) promises. In Bush's corner, it's generally believed that being a governor is more along the lines of executive experience. So, while I personally believe that Bush is a dolt (and not Obama), Bush had more credible executive experience, however dubious his success in the role. Of course, that's not going to hurt Obama, since everyone in the race, including Hillary until dropping out, had experience as a congressman and not an executive.

You talk about question marks, but any candidate will have that, since our system encourages overreaching promises, and often ones that are quite calculated and probably not ever intended for implementation (see Democrat promises to end the war in '06 or the endless GOP promise to do something about abortion). There's really no guarantee that any of them are going to fulfill campaign promises at all, so I guess that leaves only the experience question, aside from questions of general intelligence and competence (in which I think both candidates are satisfactory, this time around). McCain has more marginally relevant experience and Obama has less. It's like two bakers applying for a job as a bank teller when one has been a baker for longer than the other

What I mean to convey, when I mentioned Obama's comparison to Bush, is the fact that a large number of Americans were/are hesistant in electing both of those candidates.

Bush's problem, stemmed from his lack of eloquence and his pea-sized brain. Obama's is his limited political experience, coupled with the fact that he has no military experience and many people believe that he is all talk. Their problems are not identical in nature, but both situation poses numerous question marks in the mind of voters.

With the Clintons, on the other hand, the problems that voters complained about, were more on a personal level. I have been an extremely strong supporter of Hillary Clinton and you can say anything you want about her, but you cannot say that lady has not done her homework. You also cannot say, that she is not competent to lead. The fact that she did not win the nomination did not stem from her inabilty to become a good President. It was more of a vote against the Clintons. Not so, for Obama. His political astuteness is always questionable. So did Bush's. I am a firm believer, that where there is smoke there is fire. The point that I am trying to make is that Americans should heed that warning before we ended up with "buyers's remorse" for the next four years.

Four years is a long time.

Angry American · #**119** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

Agreed. Once again we see a speech from Obama heavy on wordage but lacking any real substance.

Speeches are wordage, at least Obama can make them, unlike old McCain, and I stress 'old,' who is about as inspiring as an 8am lecture on tin print photography. Not to mention McCain just ain't got a f'in clue about current events, culture, technology, etc. McCain even thinks he has experience winning wars.

Did you catch his interview with CC? What a f'in buffoon.

I'm sorry, knock Obama all you want--most likely just because he represents a level of intellect which you find threatening (sorry a cheap shot, but I'm going to call this one as I see it)--but to think there is an alternative in John McCain? You must be kidding; listening to McCain is becoming about as painful as listening to Dub'ya, no actually it is more painful than listening to Dub'ya, because he's so out of touch he refers to countries that don't exist, and cites people who are dead, as if they still existed and lived--and he's the Republican Party's best choice. WTF!

Given Obama and McCain, Obama isn't the lesser of two evils, Obama is hands down more qualified to be a head of state. McCain, isn't even qualified to run the days activities at an assisted living facility.

But I don't think that's the point with Obama haters, they'd vote for a pet rock, if that's who the RNC put on the ticket, and frankly in this case McCain, ain't a stones throw from a pet rock.

If only there was a third party Chia Pet to siphon votes away from McCain, oh wait there is,
Bob Barr.

I saw the speech. It wasn't a great speech, but it certainly isn't a speech you'd be hearing any Republican giving any time soon. It was a pretty safe speech, sounds nice in theory and preaches to an ideal of global peace. Sure easy to say, not so easy to do. Just the same Obama's "wordage" was a lot more inspiring as a potential world leader than McCain's outing to Schmidt's Sausage Haus und Restaurant; but that's just me.

sahara · #**120** (**permalink**) 07-24-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angry American

Speeches are wordage, at least Obama can make them, unlike old McCain, and I stress 'old,' who is about as inspiring as an 8am lecture on tin print photography. Not to mention McCain just ain't got a f'in clue about current events, culture, technology, etc. McCain even thinks he has experience winning wars.

Did you catch his interview with CC? What a f'in buffoon.

I'm sorry, knock Obama all you want--most likely just because he represents a level of intellect which you find threatening (sorry a cheap shot, but I'm going to call this one as I see it)--but to think there is an alternative in John McCain? You must be kidding; listening to McCain is becoming about as painful as listening to Dub'ya, no actually it is more painful than listening to Dub'ya, because he's so out of touch he refers to countries that don't exist, and cites people who are dead, as if they still existed and lived--and he's the Republican Party's best choice. WTF!

Given Obama and McCain, Obama isn't the lesser of two evils, Obama is hands down more qualified to be a head of state. McCain, isn't even qualified to run the days activities at an assisted living facility.

But I don't think that's the point with Obama haters, they'd vote for a pet rock, if that's who the RNC put on the ticket, and frankly in this case McCain, ain't a stones throw from a pet rock.

If only there was a third party Chia Pet to siphon votes away from McCain, oh wait there is,
Bob Barr.

I saw the speech. It wasn't a great speech, but it certainly isn't a speech you'd be hearing any Republican giving any time soon. It was a pretty safe speech, sounds nice in theory and preaches to an ideal of global peace. Sure easy to say, not so easy to do. Just the same Obama's "wordage" was a lot more inspiring as a potential world leader than McCain's outing to Schmidt's Sausage Haus und Restaurant; but that's just me.

You gotta understand, the reason why we "hate" Obama, is that we honestly believe, that he is trying to hoodwink us into believing that he has command of policy issues, is well versed in foreign and domestic affairs and that in itself make us angry.

We actually feel, that he is trying to con us. Well, people do not like the feeling of being conned. When we feel that we are, then we retaliate. In this case, we will vote for "dead wood" over the person who is trying to con us.

As a definite "non-Obama" supporter, I hope that I have cleared things up for you.