Barrack Rolled

[Daedelus84]

Greetings fellow Earthlings. I come in peace.

Enjoy.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=65I0HNvTDH4

[Mazhulsage]

What a surprise, a waste of time put on someone who's a waste of time and money... Not to mention, I thought that quite a few people voted for him because he was "African American"... That doesn't look like "African American" dancing to me.

No, I'm not being racist, I'm being anti-racist IMO, because I'm tired of stereotyping so I'm simply setting an example. Just thought that should be said, since I'm obviously going to get bashed for saying one word about Mr. Perfect, not to mention, Mr. Perfect that happens to also be of a different race than 100% white, because you can only talk crap about someone if they're 100% white.

[MrBCorp]

Probably also he couldn't be more unlike the last guy. He was clearly terrible and nobody wanted that again.

Also, isn't he part French?

[jschild]

Yeah, had nothing to do with him not being Bush, not saying that the fundamentals of the economy being strong, having a vice-president who can answer simple questions like what magazines do you read, how many houses he owns, or anything like that at all.

No, it's only because the magical media and all those people who voted for him cause he is half-black. Yep, that's the only reason at all.

[MrBCorp]

Although to be fair, I'm quite sure they played on the "being black" thing to get votes. They knew fact that any black wouldn't go down well with a particular portion of America so they concentrated on the swing voters and the ones more open to the idea of a "Black President".

[jschild]

To get that record number of votes however, required several factors.

1. Let's get this out of the way - being black. This brought out african-american voters in droves, but was also canceled out to some degree by white voters who would not vote for him. Porbably a slight favor to Obama, but not a huge one.

2. Bush - This is the single biggest reason Obama won.

3. Economy - McCain's very erratic responses to the fiscal issues seriously hurt him and was probably the second largest reason Obama won.

4. Palin - When 60-70% of the population thinks your vice-president pick isn't qualified to be vice-president, you are in trouble. Her horrible interview with Couric pretty muched trashed her reputation and she never recovered except with the party faithful, but seriously hurt McCain with his much needed Independants and Reagan Democrats.

5. Something Fresh - People were desperate after 8 years, they wanted something fresh, and McCain was many things but he wasn't fresh. Palin was, but brought her own issues.

That is why he got elected. It's not complicated and if the Republicans think trying to veto him on everything and swinging even further to the right, they will be sorely dissapointed in 2 years, unless Obama pulls something really boneheaded.

[AkuuDima]

If you followed the campaign some what and have seen some of the presidential debates, vice-presidential debates and interviews with either McCain or Obama it becomes quite clear why many are in favour for him.

Just a few pointers:
Obama was for net neutrality whilst McCain barely knows what the internet is.
Obama is very intelligent and elegant in his interviews and speaches. He explains what he means well and doesn't change his opinion on things carelessly whilst McCain does.
Obamas campaign did not provoke or focus on their opponents choices or "problems" whilst McCains campaign literally told lies about obamas campaign and used his middle name "Hussein" in vein.
Obama clearly represents a bigger "change" factor than McCain.
Obamas wife was surprisingly active in the campaign and took a big role.
Biden vs. Palin - Biden won.
Mcain is old.
Obama won by a huge margin the online world vote: http://www.iftheworldcouldvote.com/ (over 100 million people voted)

I don't like people saying things they don't know anything about.

My 2 cents.

[jschild]

Obama is very intelligent and elegant in his interviews and speaches. He explains what he means well and doesn't change his opinion on things carelessly whilst McCain does.

Actually, on most things McCain was very consistent. His only major inconsistancy was on the economy, which was the absolute worst thing to be inconsistant on.

I don't like people saying things they don't know anything about.
*cough*Mazhulsage*cough*MrBCorp*cough

No need to be calling out names btw. And I don't really think MrBCorp's even belongs in that, at least going by what he posted.

[AkuuDima]

Actually, on most things McCain was very consistent. His only major inconsistancy was on the economy, which was the absolute worst thing to be inconsistant on.

What you say is true but you make it sound as if obama and mccain were equal on that department whereas in reality McCain acted like a teenager by calling names, out right LYING and changing his opinions on matters all the time when comparing him to Obama.

No need to be calling out names btw.

I agree and I apologize for that.

[jschild]

No, but there isn't a need to exaggerate things also. On most issues, McCain was very consistant. Yes, his campaign (rarely him however) did many things wrong in regards to treatment of Obama ("That one" and refusing to face him during the first debate).

Both sides made many exaggerations and spoke untruths about the other side. The fact that Obama's side did it less does not excuse them for doing it at all.

[surodat]

What a surprise, a waste of time put on someone who's a waste of time and money...

Okay, sure, no way to prove or disprove that statement.

Not to mention, I thought that quite a few people voted for him because he was "African American"... That doesn't look like "African American" dancing to me.

Hmmm. So, J-Lo's white backup dancers are really black, Obama is really white. So says Maz's ever-nuanced analysis of race - you are what you stereotypically dance like.

No, I'm not being racist, I'm being anti-racist IMO, because I'm tired of stereotyping so I'm simply setting an example.

I read that three times and it still doesn't make any sense.

Just thought that should be said, since I'm obviously going to get bashed for saying one word about Mr. Perfect, not to mention, Mr. Perfect that happens to also be of a different race than 100% white, because you can only talk crap about someone if they're 100% white.

Those minorities are talking smack about the White Man, and Maz is ready to fight back.

Maz, you can talk smack about whoever you want, but - when you do - please form a coherent thought.

[TPMdm]

IBTL
I didn't watch the video, but just one comment about "Change you can believe in"....
When people were voting for Barack and against Clinton they were voting for change away from "old school democrats". Any buyers remorse looking at his cabinet choices and other appointments?


(obviously in the general election the "vote for change" which is turning out to be a "vote for returning to the past" is a moot point. If you were voting for President Obama you were also voting against McCain regardless of direction of change. I'm primarily addressing democrats who were voting against Sec. Clinton during the primaries)

[surodat]

I don't know if that premise is true. For those people that voted for Obama for those reasons, I would imagine it would be true.

But even then, in order to effectively govern, the Executive branch needs political clout - hence Biden, Emanuel, etc.

Democrats are a rag-tag bunch that need to be rounded up when it's time to vote - and that's what Rahm does best. :P

[jschild]

Depends on who runs the show. If Obama wants people with experience and knowledge to give thier opinions to him, then they execute his orders (whether he takes their advice or not), then what they personally want is moot.

If Obama wants them to do their own thing, with little oversight from him, then it does matter.

The cabinet does what the president wants, not the other way around. Look to how the State Department operated under Bush. Many of the things they did under Powell were choices made or implemented by Bush's direction and not Powell's. Another good example is when someone is appointed to a position they have no knowledge or experience (IE, Brown in FEMA) or actually hates or wants to dismatle that orginazation (Bolton at the UN). Again, though, that more shows the level of respect the president has for that position (FEMA = None) or what they want them to accomplish (Bolton = re-organize the UN). If the president told Bolton to behave and do what he is told, no problem (at least job wise, he is doing the president's bidding and not his own).

The single most refreshing thing I've seen is the actual scientists in the cabinet for science positions and not hacks. Now we will just have to wait and see how well he listens to him.

[Mazhulsage]

1. "I don't like people saying things they don't know anything about."

Funny how he said my name originally, considering I probably know more than most people around my age about politics. Not to mention... Another quote from you "Mcain is old." misspelled and doesn't matter, people voted against Obama because he's black, even though he's only 1/2... Doesn't mean it's all right.

2. "Obama won by a huge margin the online world vote: http://www.iftheworldcouldvote.com/ (over 100 million people voted)"

I guess I forgot that suddenly Online = Truely matters more than real life... I dunno, maybe I'm lost and thought that America votes their President in, not the world. That'd be like me throwing out a useless fact like "Obama once lived with his grandma.", it'd be useless and irrelevant to the conversation.

3. Almost every one of your other points.

Again, useless information, and most of them bs. For example "Biden won"... Okay? Was there a point to this, or was it just thrown out there as another piece of unuseful info? You also say that "McCain barely knows what the internet is." gj on that one, that'd be like me saying "McCain doesn't enjoy chicken that much I'd bet, but Obama must love chicken!" it's wrong, and ridiculous to say.

Another thing is, what's it matter if people say his middle name? Should we suddenly boo anyone who says "George W. Bush"? Oh wait, no, because it's his middle initial and he's the President, doesn't matter what you call him. You can call Bush a terrorist or something, but certainly don't say Obama's true middle name? Right...

Ooh, another thing I love is this whole "Change" thing... When exactly did he go "I'm going to change America... These are the things I'm going to do. Number one."? That's right, never. Now, he won because of this supposed "Change" and now what happened after he won? "Hey everyone, tell me what we should change." well, I thought he had ideas already? Now he suddenly needs our help on this stuff? He was supposed to have all the ideas and have them all laid out and ready for the second he got into the White House. Wrong. He lied about it.

This is a democratic forum as I well know for the years I've been coming here, and I know I'm pretty much walking up to a hippy asking them to buy my guns, but I'm just explaining my point. My original post was essentially just late night sleepy anger and I should've explained myself more, but I went to sleep like, 15 minutes later pretty much so.

I'm sure I missed a few other things, but meh... I'm not gonna spend too long just reading and writing about this topic.

[jschild]

Another thing is, what's it matter if people say his middle name? Should we suddenly boo anyone who says "George W. Bush"? Oh wait, no, because it's his middle initial and he's the President, doesn't matter what you call him. You can call Bush a terrorist or something, but certainly don't say Obama's true middle name? Right...

But people aren't calling him Barrack H. Obama, they purposely accented his middle name to make him sound foreign and arabish. Heck, I don't even know Bush's middle name (initial yes, but not name). If you are saying Republican's had no agenda when they accented his middle name (or sometimes even used it only) then you are deluding yourself.

Ooh, another thing I love is this whole "Change" thing... When exactly did he go "I'm going to change America... These are the things I'm going to do. Number one."? That's right, never. Now, he won because of this supposed "Change" and now what happened after he won? "Hey everyone, tell me what we should change." well, I thought he had ideas already? Now he suddenly needs our help on this stuff? He was supposed to have all the ideas and have them all laid out and ready for the second he got into the White House. Wrong. He lied about it.

This is just so silly. He didn't lie about it at all. He said he would do things differently. This is as bad as people who said all he spoke was "Change" and had no substance, despite having more detailed plans than McCain on most things. Agree with him or not, but he has got a team together faster than any president in 32 years and already has major plans to do on Inaugaration Day. Yes, he plans to go to work on day one. Meanwhile, Bush can't be bothered to stop his vacation to help any with the mideast crisis going on (Despite vacationing more than any previous president in history).

[Kalos]

Another thing is, what's it matter if people say his middle name? Should we suddenly boo anyone who says "George W. Bush"? Oh wait, no, because it's his middle initial and he's the President, doesn't matter what you call him. You can call Bush a terrorist or something, but certainly don't say Obama's true middle name? Right...

Hippiest or not, there is a good reason for including George W. Bush's middle initial in the common addressing of his name which isn't a problem for Obama. The previous President, George W.'s father, George H. W. Bush...well you can see the problem if we didn't use the initials, how would it be clear which one we were writing and talking about?

It is extremely unusual, the exception rather than the rule, to include someone's middle name in the day to day mentioning of that person. There is a destinction problem between George Senior and George Junior, but that is no problem for Obama, thus the majority custom should prevail and not need to make reference to his middle name in full or initials. We don't refer to a President Bill Jefferson Clinton after all.

[wyren]

I am a gun toting born again southern baptist. I voted for THAT ONE because I could care less about his race or religon. He will fix two of the tripods of global power that bush just let slide. Economic/Scientific, Cultural and Military. Bush has let our cultural and economic power just coast. His military stance is dubious and can be argued both ways. Ask three soldiers and you will get three opinions on Bush.
The world opinion does matter even if our military is supreme. Germany proved you cannot take on the whole world and win. The lines of supply get to be just too long. Alliances are fleeting but important. It is sad that bush was so aweful that Russia,, France and Germany had to get together and discuss what steps should be taken to curb American power. World opinion is important. We are wasting a lot of our military power on a war that even the proffessionals are starting to express concern over "winning". It is possible but not without the peoples support and it will not be the same government as the united states unless we are willing to sustain the effort for at least long enough for another generation. The only problem is that generation is hating us too. We neend a Roosevelt not a Patton. I do not agree with a lot of obahma's policies but at least they are not designed to be harmful to me and my friends. Our military can survive a democrat. i do no know if our economy could survive another Bush. When did democrats become good for the economy????

[TPMdm]

........When did democrats become good for the economy????

Never have and never will, but following your argument this democrat isn't as bad as the current republican I guess. IMO the best outcome of this Presidency will be a single term and a republican return to their conservative roots.

[surodat]

Never have and never will, but following your argument this democrat isn't as bad as the current republican I guess. IMO the best outcome of this Presidency will be a single term and a republican return to their conservative roots.

Of course, if you're talking about the economy, you mean their liberal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism)roots. :laugh:

[jschild]

Actually, the economy has performed better during the Democratic presidents than republicans since WWII.

However, this doesn't mean all that much since Presidents actually have little overall impact on the economy.