Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who watched Obama's announcement and did it impact your opinion of him?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 12:16 PM
Original message
Poll question: Who watched Obama's announcement and did it impact your opinion of him?
I am curious.

A lot of folks call him "charismatic" and a lot of folks see his optimism as some wild-eyed dream...



Did his announcement speech impact your attitudes about him? Did it change your attitudes about about this Primary race?

Thanks!


Laura
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. I liked his speech
but I'm still skeptical...

I don't know "what he's made of" yet.

How will he hold up under pressure?

Will his core values survive the assault they are about to experience?

We'll see..

note: George Santayana once said something to the order of "skepticism is the chastity of the intellect" and it should not be given up unti
there has been a "long courtship" with the truth.

The "courtship" with Obama has just begun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Primaries really ARE a courtship, aren't they.
Sometimes they turn out to be ok and others end up being miserable failures. Without exception, however, you have to be able to impress enough to get past that first introduction.

You are correct, ewagner, it really IS a long time for us ALL between the Primary announcement and the Primary elections.

Regards!



Laura

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. I am not comfortable when he reifies GOP lies against Dems in his effort to present
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 01:19 PM by blm
himself as a different type of Dem lawmaker. I think that is a corpmedia induced tactic that wrongs and smears many of the Democratic lawmakers who have fought long and hard for many years before him and helped bring down Bush's and GOP's poll numbers to the point where a young, black lawmaker even feels like he has the chance to make a competitive run so soon in his career.

I will vote for him if he becomes the nominee with hopes that this is all just performance art for him now, and that his truer character will emerge once he is in office.

I, for one, did not like the change in Obama from his first book to his second which relied heavily on reifying to paint himself as somehow better than the Dem's fighting base. I hope he returns to the earlier Obama values once the campaign PERFORMING comes to an end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bling bling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. So Obama should thank Kerry that a black man has a chance to be President?
You've said some really offensive things on this board. In fact, almost 100% of what you say is offensive to me and other good Democrats. But this really is over the top and crosses a line.

So instead of speaking the truth about the Congress, Obama should be kissing his white colleages feet because THEY'RE the reason he "thinks" he has a hope to be the President.

This from the same person who constantly spouts the open-book government point over and over. But the truth should only be told when it's flattering to Kerry, apparently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Do you even know what reifying is? It's picking up on RW talking points used against
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 01:17 PM by blm
Democrats as a tactic to position yourself as a different Democrat.

Like when Biden REIFIES and says that he's different as a tough on national security Democrat. Or when Obama positions himself as different and that he's respectful to religious community unlike most Democrats.

If you don't understand reifying then you don't understand my post. Not only do you not understand my post, but you are creating a completely false picture out of it. THAT should be offensive to any thinking Democrat who cares about honesty.

Here's a crash course in REIFYING.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/2/3/121715/7260

If Obama has a legitimate case to make against Dems in Congress, fine - I am more than happy to recognize their TRUE failings, as I've seen them fail to do the right thing MANY times and am not shy about saying so - but siding with RW talking points as a way of positioning yourself against Democrats shouldn't be welcomed by ANY good Democrat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bling bling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. That has nothing to do with your comments about Obama's race.
You said that the reason that "even" a black man such as Obama thinks he has a chance is because the other (white) Dems have worked so hard to make Bush look bad.

It invalidates that Obama is where he is because of anything that has to do with himself. Rather,

1. He is where he is thanks to all the other Democrats who've worked so hard.
2. He is where he is because Bush sucks so much.

Furthermore, you point out that the "other" Democrats have made Bush look SO INCREDIBLY bad in the polls, that now *even* a black man can feel he has a chance to run.

That's how it reads. Whether I understand the definition of reify has nothing to do with it, IMO.

Your words:

"I think that is a corpmedia induced tactic that wrongs and smears many of the Democratic lawmakers who have fought long and hard for many years before him and helped bring down Bush's and GOP's poll numbers to the point where a young, black lawmaker even feels like he has the chance to make a competitive run so soon in his career."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. That's your interpretation. I said it as a practical statement - if the GOPs numbers
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 02:06 PM by blm
weren't as low as they are now and have been over the last two years, I highly doubt that Obama would have chosen to run this early on, just as I think Hillary would not have announced this early on and would have waited till later in the year to announce or skipped 2008 altogether and looked down the road towards 2012.

A YOUNG, black lawmaker with little national experience - if Bush's poll numbers were high, it is HIGHLY DOUBTFUL that Obama would have chosen this election cycle to run, he would have waited a cycle or two. WHY? Because he would have said the same thing I did - that it was not time for a young, black man to make a run for the presidency when the GOP is still a dominant force. If you don't accept that for the practical statement it is, then that is YOUR kneejerking, not mine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
23. One line isn't his entire belief
I think it might be useful to overlook that one unfortunate line in order to get to the bigger picture. You know as well as I do that there are Dems in DC screwing up the works. There's also decades of promises from both parties that have not materialized for folks in the inner cities and more and more, farmers and rural Americans. There's a serious disillusion that he is speaking to, it's real and he can't deny it. If you listen to his speech today, you will hear him specifically target the Bush policies of the last 6 years. In a few instances, he said the things I thought JK should have said in 2004, and actually suggested a few times. One being, there's work to be done, and the other being a focus on all of us digging in and building community. I'm not sure he fully appreciates the distortions of the last 25 years, but I do think he gets that the basic foundation of this country is markedly off regardless of how it got there. That's better than some of the other candidates, seems to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #23
27. I think he does say things in an attractive way - but those of us who have fought media
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 02:51 PM by blm
lies actively for many years - me since joining FAIR in 1994 - it is hard to applaud the lines that are set up to appeal by validating the essence of some of those RW lies.

This isn't just Obama, though his last book was filled with reifying statements - too many Democrats do this. Lieberman has by far been the worst, but Biden, Edwards and Clinton do it, as well.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/2/3/121715/7260
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. I hear him attacking the whole thing
When he slams right wing hate radio and the cable shows, I think he gets that the media has screwed up the political debate. That's what he's referring to when he talks of the smallness of today's politics. There's a reason 50% of the people don't vote and those folks aren't going to take the time to sort through the lies, they just want a new path forward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. He should hit legitimate points, not the corpmedia spun points against Dems.
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 02:57 PM by blm
http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/2/3/121715/7260

My point against Dems is that too many are afraid of investigations - substantive investigations that don't pussyfoot around and work to bring truth to the public about the motives behind the policies. Now THAT would be a legitimate grievance to make about the Dem lawmakers.

I see it as way more substantive and way, way more legitimate than "I am a different Democrat because I am not hostile to religion like *THEY* are."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bling bling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. There you go again. I'm sorry but I refuse to stand idly by and watch this.
Your accusation about Obama accusing the other Democrats of being hostile to religion is ridiculous. He never said or even implied any such thing.

You have no idea how much I wish you would back up your accusations. I am so, so very tired of your disregard for the truth, for facts, and your contempt of any Democrat who isn't John Kerry.

You have no idea how much I wish that the DU admins would create a rule that if you're caught spreading untrue lies about Democrats you're out for the best interests of the community. Maybe not the first time. Maybe not even the 200th time. But by now blm, you've probably racked up about 500 of these poo-poo smearing posts against either Obama or other Democrats.

The day you have a fact-based (not links to blogs) legitimate reason used to try and convince this community why a Democrat (besides Kerry) doesn't deserve our support I will fall over.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #35
38. You are over-reacting. I am not the first person to say Obama shouldn't validate
RW talking points against Dems and religious values.

There have been many threads on it over the past year and started by many others here NOT me.

You might be interested in checking the DU archives for when Obama made his comments (last week in June 2006), and for those threads discussing his last book.

You completely DON'T get me. You have seen my criticisms of Clinton and Obama and you extrapolate that to be against ALL Democrats. I have defended MANY Democrats, even Clinton and Obama on subjects where they deserved defending, but that doesn't stop me from criticizing them in areas where I am concerned.

Anyway - back to Obama and reification:

Obama Closes Daou's Triangle On Electoral Strategy
by Chris Bowers, Wed Jun 28, 2006 at 01:27:18 PM EST

One of the reasons there is so much angst over what Obama said about Democrats and religion today is that, in Peter Daou's formulation, Obama's comments lend tri-partisan support (Democrats, Republicans and the media) to a narrative that Democrats are hostile toward people of faith. This tri-partisan support will result in a "closing of the triangle" against Democrats where it become conventional wisdom that Democrats are hostile to people of faith. This has been how the DLC has managed to reify ever anti-Democratic narrative it likes within the national discourse. So thanks Senator Obama, for reifying this Republican-driven talking point about Democrats. Now almost everyone will think that Democrats are hostile to people of faith. Well done. Your mentor, Joe Lieberman, would be proud.

Being someone who is preoccupied with electoral strategy, I want to focus on how this narrative is perhaps even more dangerous to progressives than the rather simple "Democrats are hostile to faith" narrative it engenders. In a national environment where both parties must focus their electoral strategy on courting the most conservative and pro-Republican voter in the country, we end up with a Congress that is only responsive to the most conservative, pro-Republican voters in the country. In the electoral strategy Obama reifies with his comments, progressive don't matter. Moderates don't matter. Swing voters don't matter. Independents and Democrats don't matter. Many Republicans don't even matter. The only people who matter are the most conservative people in the country. A Congress that is only responsive and responsible to those voters will, no matter who is in charge of Congress, end up producing the most right-wing legislation imaginable.

As an electoral strategist I respect, Tom Schaller, wrote to me in an email today:
Imagine for a second that, after the 2000 election in which his candidate finished second, the main media narrative was that Karl Rove needed to figure out a way to reach out to, say, unmarried, professional, college-educated women of color living in cities and suburbs of blue states. He'd have been laughed out of his party and DC.

Yet somehow, conversely, the prevailing narrative that people like Obama are ratifying is that if Democrats don't bow and scrape to white, evangelical, married, non-college educated white males in the south and rural communities---well, then they're tactically stupid, myopic, and out-of-touch. (And, because women, seculars, urban-surburbanites, college grads, and minorities are an increasing share of the electorate with each passing cycle, the "jessica alba vote" is at least a growth market, whereas the bubbas are a shrinking market.)

Rove loses an election, surveys the situation, and concludes that the GOP left 4 million evangelicals off the table and they need to find and mobilize them. We lose four years later and conclude that, um, we need to talk to evangelicals. In other words, they lose and turn to their base, but we lose and turn to...THEIR base! Am I losing my mind or is this about as absurdly upside-down ass-backwards as possible?
Obama has not only helped close the triangle on the notion that Democrats are hostile to religion, he has closed the triangle on who Democrats should appeal to in order to win elections. This danger of this is that in a nation where the only voters who matter to both parties are conservative evangelicals, then the only legislation we will ever get will be of the sort that appeals to conservative evangelicals. This will be the case no matter which party is in charge of Congress. Thus, closing the triangle on electoral strategy in this manner completely obliterates progressivism itself.
>>>>>>

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/6/28/132718/681
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bling bling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. I remember the religious discussion very well.
And I rememember it essentially boiled down to an argument between the people who had actually watched the speech or read the transcript and those who read the "highlighted" quotes that were pulled out of context and got all hot under the collar.

In any event, it is fundamentally incorrect and a grave mischaracterization to assert that Obama separates himself from the other Dems by accusing them of being hostile to religion. He has done no such thing. Again, you use some blogger to back up your POV. That's about as relevant as if I get my husband to write a little ditty on our website that totally agrees with something I say about Obama and then I link to it. Just because you can find some blogger who's opinion matches yours doesn't really solidify your argument. What would be impressive is for you to provide the whole context of the actual speech and prove your point that way. Show me, using factual information, how he separating himself from the other Dems running by accusing them of being hostile to religion.

If you can do that, then you've made an argument I can't dispute.

I don't want you to stop the accusations. The more informed I am about the strengths AND weaknesses of the Dem candidates, the better for me.

All I want is for the accusations to be accurate and based in reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #39
51. I didn't say he was separating himself from other Dems running, I said he uses
language that REIFIES the RW talking point that Dems are hostile to religion. There is more proof that exists that many in the GOP are more hostile to other religions than there exists that Dem party is hostile to religion, but it seems to be the Dems that get the lecturing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bling bling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. I've found something I agree with you on.
"There is more proof that exists that many in the GOP are more hostile to other religions than there exists that Dem party is hostile to religion, but it seems to be the Dems that get the lecturing."

There was a guy on Colbert the other night that wrote a book called American Fascists. It was about the fundie right wing Christian leaders and it looked fascinating.

Anyway, I find that whenever the GOP accuses the Democratic Party of something, there's a good bet that the GOP is simply projecting their own issues on to us. And it's very frustrating when people in the Democratic Party fall for it. I think Obama would agree with me on that too. I remember that being a point within that speech about religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. I like Obama. I think he IS qualified to be president. I think he would make a
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 12:38 PM by Kahuna
good president. But I think Gore or Clark would be awesome. So, I'm not really that excited about any of the declared candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Like a lot of IL Clarkies I've been torn.
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 12:54 PM by davsand
Kahuna, you have NO idea how much angst several of the IL Clarkies have been going through with this one. A lot of them know and like Obama (and have even worked/volunteered for him in one race or anther) but they also really think the General would be a bang up candidate.

Not to be cliche, but your pain is a shared one...


Laura



edited because my typing is awful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
8. I LOVED his speech and am now leaning in his direction.
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 01:03 PM by in_cog_ni_to
I would love to see the day this country elects an African American and want badly to vote for him...he IS MY Senator and is rated the 17th most LIBERAL Senator in the Senate. That puts him to the left of most of the Dems. I REALLY like the guy.

On the other hand, I'd also love to see the day this country elects a female President, but Hillary just won't apologize for that damn IWR vote. She won't admit it was wrong. I cannot vote for her unless she does those 2 things.:( That's why I'm leaning toward Barack Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rebel with a cause Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. to me a woman or a minority are equal on the elect scale.
They both break the habit of electing a white man. And yes I do like some of the candidates that are white males, but right now I feel like we need a little bit (which to some of you may mean a whole lot) of diversity. I have a selfish reason for how I feel. I want life here on earth to change for the better before I leave it, and I would love to have a little bit to do with it, even if it is only with a vote. I prefer Obama to Hilary. He is my senator also, and I have met him. I trust him. His speech today made me feel hope again, and that is something I have not felt for a long time. Well, not for over two years. I felt it in 2004 when I use to go hear him speak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Does that message of hope and inclusion carry a lot of weight?
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 01:48 PM by davsand
I've been thinking about that since I saw an article that talked about the trend that Presidents typically (historically) represent the opposite of whoever is currently in the White House.

Right now we have--well, you know as well as I do what we are dealing with in the White House--and I do think Obama offers up the image of ideal that is lacking currently. I have wondered if Obama's message of hope and inclusion for the average guy really IS "the" message that the voters are looking for.

What do you think?


Laura


Edited to correct a typo spellcheck missed!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. I'm not yet sold on Obama
But I agree, his message of hope and inclusion is compelling. I do think the average working-class voter will respond in a positive way to that type of branding.

If he's the nominee, I'll certainly support him, but it's way early and I'm still on the Kucinich train as long as it keeps rolling.

Thanks for a thoughtful OP. Good thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. Thank you for taking time to provide feedback.
I've been amazed at the range of responses.

I think a lot of people (and I'd expect this to be the case!) in our country are not decided yet on this Primary. I do think the number of people on DU who hold strong opinions is probably a lot greater than it would be in the general public (after all--this is a self selecting population in the form of a board for people who are interested in politics.)

I am a little surprised, however, at how much acrimony and distrust already is present here THIS early into the Primary. I have to wonder if part of that is residual anger from other races and threads here at DU over the years. Maybe it is personal stuff coming out--I honestly don't know.

Regards!



Laura
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rebel with a cause Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
26. For me it does, but
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 02:38 PM by rebel with a cause
I followed his campaign in 2004 and that is what drew me to him then. I saw the way people reacted to him then and how they did today when he gave his speech. Here in Southern Illinois, yes that is what the average guy was (and probably still is) looking for. That is why he was/ and is so popular here. some republicans here voted for Obama, Democrats who did not support Kerry voted for Obama, Independents voted for Obama, and of course Liberal Democrats voted for Obama. Edited to add, my daughter is arguing me that I am wrong about this and Obama did not do as good as I thought he did. But then she is a nay sayer and if I say the sky is blue, she says it is purple. I know that he won by a large majority.

By the out pour you saw today in Springfield it is obvious that Illinois still supports our freshman Senator. I listened to him today, and there were things said that brought me back into his camp. It reminded me of why I had supported him three years ago. I was holding out before, hoping that another candidate would get into the race, but today made me stop waiting, it made me want Obama for president, not just VP as I had thought before.

When I was a teenager we were in the cold war, and we were told that the world would not survive until we were adults. We would not live long enough to have families, so we might as well accept that we had no futures. The Kennedys came along and all that changed. That same feeling is in the world today, and the same feeling of hope that John and Robert Kennedy gave us was there today. I don't know if this feeling can be kept alive under the attacks of the republicans but we can hope.

On CSPAN today, they were talking about the only candidate that was never attacked by the media was mccain, and I thought that is just what happened in 2000 and 2004, the only candidate that was not attacked was bush. Can any democrat candidate withstand the biased media attacks? That is a question that only time will answer but perhaps the message of hope is one that will withstand even the republican hate machine.

I don't know if this answered your question. I hope it did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
never cry wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #26
34. Here's a link to a county by county senate vote map
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Katherine Brengle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #9
43. I think the American people will elect a black man before a woman --
remember, black men got the right to vote before women did. I think the presidency will roll out the same way.

Might not be right, but I think that's how it will play out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. What are you, the Obama marketing department?
Is he for public campaign finance?

Will he investigate all allegations of government crime including 9/11, and bring criminal charges for Iraq?

Is he for European-type health care?

Will he end the drug war? At least legalize pot and release the untold thousands whose lives have been ruined by its prohibition?

Will he cut the Pentagon down to half or less of its present budget and use it to hire teachers and nurses?

Will he outlaw covert operations?

Who cares about our "impressions" of his image?

Isn't this stuff supposed to be on GD: Politics?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Gee, Someone's In A Tizzy. Nothin Wrong With A Quick Opinion Poll. Sheesh!
Methinks thou dost protest too much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. No kidding! Someone got up on the wrong side of the bed today.
My goodness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. They Need To Drink Coffee From An Ooga Booga Smooga Wooga Mug Like I Do LOL
Seriously though, never ceases to amaze me how ANYTHING can be reason for someone to get all uptight here sometimes. So weird.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Sorry to trouble you. Feel free to use the DU ignore feature.
I'm not part of his campaign and I really have no idea about his positions on some of what you asked.

You may want to find out sometime before the Primary, I'd think.


Laura
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. This is a good thread
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratefultobelib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #15
24. Quit apologizing...I always learn from threads like yours!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #15
47. Not troubling at all - here's the speech transcript
I'm not troubled by your post, simply skeptical of focusing on the person while saying nothing about his proposed policy. That's what smacks of marketing. Sorry.

Those who didn't see the appearance can still read the speech and decide what it says to them. Here it is.

---

Transcript of Barack Obama's Speech

SPRINGFIELD, Ill., Feb. 10, 2007

(CBS) What follows is the complete text of Sen. Barack Obama's speech before the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Ill., in which the Illinois Democrat officially announced he was running for president.


Thank you so much. Praise and honor to God for bringing us together today. Thank you so much. I am so grateful to see all of you.

Let me begin by saying thanks to all of you who've traveled, from far and wide, to brave the cold today.

I'm fired up.

We all made this journey for a reason. It's humbling to see a crowd like this , but in my heart I know you didn't come here just for me. No, you came here because you believe in what this country can be. In the face of war, you believe there can be peace. In the face of despair, you believe there can be hope. In the face of a politics that's shut you out, that's told you to settle, that's divided us for too long, you believe that we can be one people, reaching for what's possible, building that more perfect union.

That's the journey we're on today. But let me tell you how I came to be here. As most of you know, I am not a native of this great state. I moved to Illinois over two decades ago. I was a young man then, just a year out of college; I knew no one in Chicago when I arrived, was without money or family connections. But a group of churches had offered me a job as a community organizer for the grand sum of $13,000 a year. And I accepted the job, sight unseen, motivated then by a single, simple, powerful idea — that I might play a small part in building a better America.

My work took me to some of Chicago's poorest neighborhoods. I joined with pastors and lay-people to deal with communities that had been ravaged by plant closings. I saw that the problems people faced weren't simply local in nature — that the decision to close a steel mill was made by distant executives; that the lack of textbooks and computers in schools could be traced to the skewed priorities of politicians a thousand miles away; and that when a child turns to violence, I came ot realize that there's a hole in that boy's heart no government could ever fill.

It was in these neighborhoods that I received the best education I ever had, and where I learned the meaning of my Christian faith.

After three years of this work, I went to law school, because I wanted to understand how the law should work for those in need. I became a civil rights lawyer, and taught constitutional law, and after a time, I came to understand that our cherished rights of liberty and equality depend on the active participation of an awakened electorate. It was with these ideas in mind that I arrived in this capital city as a state Senator.

It was here, in Springfield, where I saw all that is America converge — farmers and teachers, businessmen and laborers, all of them with a story to tell, all of them seeking a seat at the table, all of them clamoring to be heard. I made lasting friendships here — friends that I see in the audience here today.

It was here we learned to disagree without being disagreeable — that it's possible to compromise so long as you know those principles that can never be compromised; and that so long as we're willing to listen to each other, we can assume the best in people instead of the worst.

It's why we were able to reform a death penalty system that was broken. That's why we were able to give health insurance to children in need. That's why we made the tax system right here in Springfield more fair and just for working families, and that's why we passed ethics reforms that the cynics said could never, ever be passed.

It was here, in Springfield, where North, South, East and West come together that I was reminded of the essential decency of the American people — where I came to believe that through this decency, we can build a more hopeful America.

And that is why, in the shadow of the Old State Capitol, where Lincoln once called on a house divided to stand together, where common hopes and common dreams still live, I stand before you today to announce my candidacy for President of the United States of America.

Now listen, I recognize there is a certain presumptuousness — a certain audacity — to this announcement. I know I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change.

The genius of our founders is that they designed a system of government that can be changed. And we should take heart, because we've changed this country before. In the face of tyranny, a band of patriots brought an Empire to its knees. In the face of secession, we unified a nation and set the captives free. In the face of Depression, we put people back to work and lifted millions out of poverty. We welcomed immigrants to our shores, we opened railroads to the west, we landed a man on the moon, and we heard a King's call to let justice roll down like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream.

Each and every time, a new generation has risen up and done what's needed to be done. Today we are called once more — and it is time for our generation to answer that call.

For that is our unyielding faith — that in the face of impossible odds, people who love their country can change it.

That's what Abraham Lincoln understood. He had his doubts. He had his defeats. He had his setbacks. But through his will and his words, he moved a nation and helped free a people. It is because of the millions who rallied to his cause that we are no longer divided, North and South, slave and free. Because men and women of every race, from every walk of life, continued to march for freedom long after Lincoln was laid to rest, that today we have the chance to face the challenges of this millennium together, as one people — as Americans.

All of us know what those challenges are today — a war with no end, a dependence on oil that threatens our future, schools where too many children aren't learning, and families struggling paycheck to paycheck despite working as hard as they can. We know the challenges. We've heard them. We've talked about them for years.

What's stopped us from meeting these challenges is not the absence of sound policies and sensible plans. What's stopped us is the failure of leadership, the smallness of our politics — the ease with which we're distracted by the petty and trivial, our chronic avoidance of tough decisions, our preference for scoring cheap political points instead of rolling up our sleeves and building a working consensus to tackle the big problems of America.

For the last six years we've been told that our mounting debts don't matter, we've been told that the anxiety Americans feel about rising health care costs and stagnant wages are an illusion, we've been told that climate change is a hoax, we've been told that tough talk and an ill-conceived war can replace diplomacy, and strategy, and foresight. And when all else fails, when Katrina happened, or the death toll in Iraq mounts, we've been told that our crises are somebody else's fault. We're distracted from our real failures, and told to blame the other party, or gay people, or immigrants.

And as people have looked away in disillusionment and frustration, we know what's filled the void. The cynics, the lobbyists, the special interests who've turned our government into a game only they can afford to play. They write the checks and you get stuck with the bills, they get the access while you get to write a letter, they think they own this government, but we're here today to take it back. The time for that kind of politics is over. It is through. It's time to turn the page right here and right now.

Now look, we have made some progress already. I was proud to help lead the fight in Congress that led to the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.

But Washington has a long way to go. And it won't be easy. That's why we'll have to set priorities. We'll have to make hard choices. And although government will play a crucial role in bringing about the changes that we need, more money and programs alone will not get us to where we need to go. Each of us, in our own lives, will have to accept responsibility — for instilling an ethic of achievement in our children, for adapting to a more competitive economy, for strengthening our communities, and sharing some measure of sacrifice. So let us begin. Let us begin this hard work together. Let us transform this nation.

Let us be the generation that reshapes our economy to compete in the digital age. Let's set high standards for our schools and give them the resources they need to succeed. Let's recruit a new army of teachers, and give them better pay and more support in exchange for more accountability. Let's make college more affordable, and let's invest in scientific research, and let's lay down broadband lines through the heart of inner cities and rural towns all across America. We can do that.

And as our economy changes, let's be the generation that ensures our nation's workers are sharing in our prosperity. Let's protect the hard-earned benefits their companies have promised. Let's make it possible for hardworking Americans to save for retirement. Let's allow our unions and their organizers to lift up this country's middle-class again. We can do that.

Let's be the generation that ends poverty in America. Every single person willing to work should be able to get job training that leads to a job, and earn a living wage that can pay the bills, and afford child care so their kids can have a safe place to go when they work. We can do this.

And let's be the generation that finally tackles our health care crisis. We can control costs by focusing on prevention, by providing better treatment for the chronically ill, and using technology to cut the bureaucracy. Let's be the generation that says right here, right now, we will have universal health care in America by the end of the next president's first term. We can do that.

Let's be the generation that finally frees America from the tyranny of oil. We can harness homegrown, alternative fuels like ethanol and spur the production of more fuel-efficient cars. We can set up a system for capping greenhouse gases. We can turn this crisis of global warming into a moment of opportunity for innovation, and job creation, and an incentive for businesses that will serve as a model for the world. Let's be the generation that makes future generations proud of what we did here.

Most of all, let's be the generation that never forgets what happened on that September day and confront the terrorists with everything we've got. Politics doesn't have to divide us on this anymore — we can work together to keep our country safe. I've worked with Republican Senator Dick Lugar to pass a law that will secure and destroy some of the world's deadliest weapons. We can work together to track down terrorists with a stronger military, we can tighten the net around their finances, and we can improve our intelligence capabilities and finally get homeland security right. But let us also understand that ultimate victory against our enemies will come only by rebuilding our alliances and exporting those ideals that bring hope and opportunity to millions of people around the globe. We can do those things.

But all of this cannot come to pass until we bring an end to this war in Iraq. Most of you know that I opposed this war from the start. I thought it was a tragic mistake. Today we grieve for the families who have lost loved ones, the hearts that have been broken, and the young lives that could have been. America, it is time to start bringing our troops home. It's time to admit that no amount of American lives can resolve the political disagreement that lies at the heart of someone else's civil war. That's why I have a plan that will bring our combat troops home by March of 2008. Letting the Iraqis know that we will not be there forever is our last, best hope to pressure the Sunni and Shia to come to the table and find peace.

And there is one other thing that is not too late to get right about this war — and that is the homecoming of the men and women — our veterans — who have sacrificed the most. Let us honor their courage by providing the care they need and rebuilding the military they love. Let us be the generation that begins that work.

I know there are those who don't believe we can do all these things. I understand the skepticism. After all, every four years, candidates from both parties make similar promises, and I expect this year will be no different. All of us running for president will travel around the country offering ten-point plans and making grand speeches; all of us will trumpet those qualities we believe make us uniquely qualified to lead the country. But too many times, after the election is over, and the confetti is swept away, all those promises fade from memory, and the lobbyists and the special interests move in, and people turn away, disappointed as before, left to struggle on their own.

That's why this campaign can't only be about me. It must be about us — it must be about what we can do together. This campaign must be the occasion, the vehicle, of your hopes, and your dreams. It will take your time, your energy, and your advice — to push us forward when we're doing right, and to let us know when we're not. This campaign has to be about reclaiming the meaning of citizenship, restoring our sense of common purpose, and realizing that few obstacles can withstand the power of millions of voices calling for change.

By ourselves, this change will not happen. Divided, we are bound to fail.

But the life of a tall, gangly, self-made Springfield lawyer tells us that a different future is possible.

He tells us that there is power in words.

He tells us that there is power in conviction.

That beneath all the differences of race and region, faith and station, we are one people.

He tells us that there is power in hope.

As Lincoln organized the forces arrayed against slavery, he was heard to say this: "Of strange, discordant, and even hostile elements, we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought to battle through."

That is our purpose here today.

That is why I'm in this race.

Not just to hold an office, but to gather with you to transform a nation.

I want to win that next battle — for justice and opportunity.

I want to win that next battle — for better schools, and better jobs, and better health care for all.

I want us to take up the unfinished business of perfecting our union, and building a better America.

And if you will join with me in this improbable quest, if you feel destiny calling, and see as I see, a future of endless possibility stretching before us; if you sense, as I sense, that the time is now to shake off our slumber, and slough off our fear, and make good on the debt we owe past and future generations, then I am ready to take up the cause, and march with you, and work with you. Today, together, we can finish the work that needs to be done, and usher in a new birth of freedom on this Earth. Thank you very much everybody — let's get to work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. Thank you, Jackriddler. Thanks for posting this.
I agree with you that people can read the speech and see how it plays out for them.

I think this Primary will be a long and bloody one on the Dem side. I also think the ONLY way we are going to come out of it as a unified party (irrespective of who is the ultimate nominee!) is if we all work with a spirit of cooperation with each other.



Laura
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
13. I Haven't Seen It Yet But I'm Sure It Was Quite Impressive. Obama Has Yet To Fail To Impress Me.
He's most definitely someone we should all be quite proud to have in our party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
14. I've made a switch
Obama made me now pick him over Edwards. I still don't know about his chances of winning, but for now, he's the best except for Kucinich IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
22. other
I like the stained glass kitties pic. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. Thanks, Swamp Rat!
My skinny kittie avatar and the fat happy cat pictures I use in my sig line carry a meaning for me. The skinny cat has always been there to remind me that so many in our world (both animal and human!) are living "skinny"--meaning without.

My happy (or fat cats) are there to remind me of what I'm doing this for. I want to see a day when we don't HAVE "skinny" any more. This particular kitty pic is actually a quilt done in a stained glass style. How cool is THAT?

What are you doing taking polls online? I figured you'd be out in the streets with Fat Tuesday coming up!


Laura
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. Fat Tuesday ain't here yet dawlin'!
love dem kitties. :hi:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
29. While I love Clark, I like Obama......very much.......however,
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 03:29 PM by FrenchieCat
patience is a virtue and we have time!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mnhtnbb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
33. Other--didn't watch. I didn't believe Edwards was ready in 04 and I think Obama's in the same place
right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
36. Other:
I didn't watch because I'm not interested in what he has to say. I don't "dislike" him. I just don't find him charismatic, I'm not won over by his record so far, and am not interested.

Rhetoric is not going to distract me from looking at any candidate's record on the issues; that's how I determine who I will vote for. I find action on issues to be irresistible, lol.

At this point in time, I'm not interested in Obama. In another 8 years or so, when he has plenty of time speaking, acting, introducing legislation, and voting to back his words, I'll take another look.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 04:11 PM
Response to Original message
37. I liked him before but I turned the channel when he started out praising God.
I know I have to put up with it but geez, you lose me when you go off on religion. This is not a church sermon. Leave it there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prolesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #37
58. It was like one line
I'm an atheist and it didn't bother me in the least.

People of true faith, the ones who see Jesus as the radical liberal that he is presented to be, do the world far more good than harm. His actions show him to be that type of person, particularly the work he did in Chicago.

Both Kennedy and King were very religious. Would you have flipped the channel on them as well?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
40. Good speech, imo, and looked like a good crowd given the cold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EndElectoral Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
41. Missing option on poll...no impact either way. Waiting for his actions?
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 05:59 PM by EndElectoral
Will he join Fengold to request a binding withdrawal. I don't think he will. Lots of rhetoric, but the record is slim. Waiting to see his stance on a lot more issues. I woudl have to vote for him over Hillarfy, but at this point he'd rate about 5th or 6th to me behind Gore-Clark-Vilsack-Dodd-Kucinich even though the press gives him and Clinton all the attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #41
45. A valid point. It is too late to edit however.
I should have included a no change option. You raise a valid point. Can you tell I'm not a professional pollster?

:)

Thanks for responding. I think you probably represent a LOT of people's attitude about this race THIS far out. A whole lot can happen to influence voters between now and election day. I think most folks will agree that more than a few elections have been won or lost within a few HOURS let alone this many months out.

Regards!


Laura
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Katherine Brengle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
42. Other --
I thought he was incredible this morning. I already liked him, I think I like him a tad more now.

I'm on the fence over whether or not he's the right candidate, but he's on my personal short list for now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
44. He was all right. I liked his words very much, but I'm not a fan of a "cool" demeanor.
Edited on Sat Feb-10-07 06:42 PM by WinkyDink
I like barn-burning passion in my politicians, especially now when we live in such perilous times.

I don't find Barak to be charismatic, but maybe I need to be there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prolesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #44
59. Which candidate do you see
with that barn-burning passion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FyurFly Donating Member (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
46. I like him but.....

He doesn't respect my INDIVIDUAL 2nd Amendment right. If his views on gun control was different I would be volunteering to assist his campaign doing whatever I could to help. I think he could be a breath of fresh air in Washington, but I can't support him with his views on my gun rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSlayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
48. Other: He's okay with me but I don't want him as the nominee.
I just don't think he's done anything to merit being the President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
50. After his Boston keynote address in 2004 I could see that Barack Obama
was a force to be reckoned with. That was one hell of a speech and it had the gathering of Democratic party folks I was with howling and cheering.

I thought today's speech was almost as good. I loved the C-Span shots of the crowd. It was political energy at its best, and for its highest purpose. Good for Senator Obama.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
53. He is way better than them Pub Guys.....vote BLUE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
54. His anti-Second Amendment statements are not winning me over
Edited on Sun Feb-11-07 12:46 PM by derby378
"...ordinary citizens should not be allowed to own military assault weapons, such as AK-47s and Uzis."

"I have been willing to stand up to the gun lobby in Springfield and would continue to do so in Washington whenever its agenda diverges from the best interests of our communities and law-enforcement officials."

On the 1994 semi-auto ban: "I believe we need to renew--not roll back--this common sense gun law."

Baltimore Sun article on Obama

Our next Democratic President cannot be another gun-grabber. My support for Gore is tempered with with his own flip-flop attitude on gun legislation in the past, but I'm hoping that if he formally declares his own campaign, he will try to make peace with gun owners - something that both Clinton and Obama have failed to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davsand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. Have any of the announced candidates been right on that issue in your opinion?
It is so early I honestly don't know...


Laura
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #55
56. It's a little difficult to tell
I can't afford to be a single-issue voter - whomever wins the nomination gets my vote.

Clinton, Obama, and Edwards have fairly well-documented positions on gun legislation. Bill Richardson might be worth watching in this regard, seeing that he hails from New Mexico, but it will probably be some time. I haven't found too much on him concerning gun legislation, at least not yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmatthan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 10:34 PM
Response to Original message
57. Did you see his Bush mannerisms?

The reaching down to touch somebody, the wave to nobody, the artificial smile, great words which are only written to get attention forgetting the actual votes in congress, ....

It was as if Bush was walking across the screen!

Maybe that is American politics of acting to win elections?

But that is exactly what America does not need today if it is to be welcomed back into the world of civilised nations!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 11:02 PM
Response to Original message
60. Obama excellant representative for the United States. At least the world will
begin to stop hating Americans...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 11:11 PM
Response to Original message
61. That speech converted every Democrat I personally know
Everyone I talked to loved the speech! I am now much more of a fan than I was. Still not my first choice but he is someone I would be very excited about as President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC