Obama just said the four of them were there because they were better than the four who were not ther

Now that came across as he thinks aanyonje of them is better than Joe Biden? Sorry, that fucking slip just earned him enough negative points with me that it will take a truck of good stuff from him to recover. He added more as an after thought that htey also were superior(better) than any republican. But he CLEARLY hit Dodd Biden Kucinich and Gravel.

I think he was saying that the four of them who were there, plus the ones who were no longer there, were far better than any of the Republicans.

In a forum like they had tonite,
I think he would have done really
well.

than the GOPers.

BUT he did say it

Unreal

I think he dissed Biden and co. Not necessary as the frontrunner.

and he was right.

:crazy:

life. I rather suspect he will have to clarify that one tomorrow

Step away from the keyboard....

who had preceded them.

who had preceded them.

It's starting to get boring, people.

When the truth doesn't work, some try another tactic.

Geez

I do believe you started out with an Obama deficit, so all this kvetching and hand-wringing is really just a dog and pony show.

he is just so ill-prepared. Very disrespectful.

:hi:

The following graf makes that clear.

it, why dont you go to ABC and read the transcript when they get it up instead of attacking another progressive.

just going by what the OP posted. :eyes:

it's no skin off my nose.:hi:

Put aside your us/them filter for a moment. Obama was obviously talking about the Republican candidates. I don't know how you could think otherwise.

"SEN. OBAMA: Well, you know, there have been all kinds of, you know, aspects to my debate performance that I'd love to correct or sharpen, but over all, I actually -- here's an area where I agree with Hillary, that there has been a stark contrast generally between the four of us and those who aren't debating with us now but were previously."

Now tell me you fucking little snot nosed twits that he was referring to REPUBLICANS!!!!!!

and here is the link!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/05/us/politics/05text-ddebate.html

Are you high right now? He's clearly talking about the Republicans. When he says he agrees with Hillary he's agreeing with her that there is a stark contrast between the Dems and the Goopers.

I'm not the one desperately attacking a candidate.

A stark contrast between all of them is not saying anybody is better than anybody else.

You need some comprehension skills.

Nice try. As the following paragraph makes clear, that was to be read as "Those who are not debating with us now, but who were (debating) previously," meaning the Republicans. You understood it to mean, "Those who are not debating with us now, but who were (debating with us) previously," which would mean the Democrats, but which would make absolutely no sense whatsoever in context. I have to think your failure to comprehend is intentional.

He was talking about the Republicans. Wow, how could something be taken so completely out of context?

"stark contrast generally between the four of us and those who aren't debating with us now but were previously (add debating in this room)."

as the following paragraph makes clear, that was to be read as "Those who are not debating with us now, but who were (debating) previously," meaning the Republicans. You understood it to mean, "Those who are not debating with us now, but who were (debating with us) previously," which would mean the Democrats, but which would make absolutely no sense whatsoever in context. I have to think your failure to comprehend is intentional.

how many times we parse the sentence for them word for word. I think you're right about the intentional failure to comprehend. English is not first language for some :-)

.

He was referring to the Republicans that had the stage previously, you snot-nosed idiot.

shit as you go along just like that scam artist hillary clinton.

wrong.

as the following paragraph makes clear, that was to be read as "Those who are not debating with us now, but who were (debating) previously," meaning the Republicans. You understood it to mean, "Those who are not debating with us now, but who were (debating with us) previously," which would mean the Democrats, but which would make absolutely no sense whatsoever in context. I have to think your failure to comprehend is intentional.

Is there an echo in here?

Enlighten us.. (you) ignorant ones..

Any sentence can be misconstrued. Just an example of the OPs ability to be misconstrued :-)

Perhaps you may have misread it? His comma appears to be correctly placed for someone who is using sarcasm and is perhaps being a bit facetious. If I am correct and you are, indeed, misreading it, is beyond Didereaux's control. In your example you present pauses that are not there in the sentence. Of course, sentences can be misconstrued~~~even when they are read correctly. I felt that Obama's statement was a jab at the Democrats who were not there debating in NH. A low blow in my book. I watched it with someone who disagreed with me. My friend felt that Obama mis~spoke but that his intention was clear: no attack against the other Democratic candidates was implied or intended.

I believe that Obama has trouble speaking (not unlike the current Resident in Chief) and is therefore prone to foot-in-mouth disease.

I'm not sure why you had so much trouble following it. :shrug:

Could that be it?

making a bizarre jab at Democrats for no apparent reason whatsoever, which he cleverly introduced by invoking Hillary's jab at Republicans, and then followed with a few more jabs at Republicans.

Oops.

dumbass