Obama Responds

I do not trust Obama. I do not trust his loyalty or committment to the United States of America. The fact of Reverand Wright, Anti-American Ayers, wife's "never proud of my country" speech and now the Pennsylvania "gun-toting, religious, bitter losers" of PA. It all adds up to a very angry, passive-aggresive attitude. I think he follows those who speak his thoughts....

Magda: thank you.

Nancy | Apr 12, 2008 11:49:13 AM said:

"The man is so eloquent his meaning is lost in a reading by a person with an agenda."

Nancy, prattle on all you want. You merely reinforce the horrible impression Obama is making on the country. I have three advanced degrees, and I long ago concluded that Obama's "eloquence" is meaningless when you realize that the message is empty. At this point, his lips may be moving, but a lot of people are tuning him out. I bet he gets torpedoed in Pennsylvania.

Having been born in the segregated South, I have come to understand racism. Sometimes it is overt; more often nowadays it is covert. It is my belief that Obama is a racist: he continues to resent his mother's race (his words from his book). Such a man or woman is not fit to be president, period.

Obama is a fraud. He is a slick corrupt politician from Chicago. He is an elitist, a racist and a socialist.
His followers cling to 'hope' and 'change' as actual reasons to vote for him, while continuing to convince themselves that the fantasy of who they want Obama to be still exists.

The problem is: Obama is the ‘dream’ of the politically correct crowd and they will just ignore anything that gets in the way of the fairy tale.
Obama could butcher a kitten on the White House lawn and the media would make it sound like a good thing!

NO OBAMA IN 2008! HE HAS TOLD TOO MANY LIES!

Nancy | Apr 12, 2008 11:49:13 AM said:

"The man is so eloquent his meaning is lost in a reading by a person with an agenda".

eloquent |ˈeləkwənt| adjective
fluent or persuasive in speaking or writing : an eloquent speech. • clearly expressing or indicating something

Believe what you want to believe ....

Lori 11:08.

Forgive me for piggybacking on your comment. I'm (unfortunately?) white. I'm a rightward-leaning independent who, without knowing much of Obama, initially considered his candidacy.

No way after Jeremiah Wright. I just don't get Obama. He's absurdly unqualified. Quite honestly, if he doesn't win the election, his career is over. I grew up in Illinois, and I doubt he wants to return there for a re-election campaign in 2010. I bet he'll be working at appointed positions or in educational positions the rest of his life.

As intelligent as he is, he's actually a trainwreck when he's not working from carefully scripted remarks on a teleprompter. He's really no better than a news broadcaster. How many of these gaffes is the mainstream media going to allow him? These aren't instances of being momentarily tongue-tied.

In the end, consider where he was delivering the speak. In this case, context supports the obvious reading of the words. As I heard and later read his remarks, I was reminded of the famous Al Campanis interview with Ted Koppel on "Nightline" in 1987. I saw that live and couldn't believe Campanis said the things that he said. He was pilloried for those remarks. So should Obama. I'm looking forward to the Democrats trying to look united while backing this loser.

Now Obama gets the obligatory do-over. "I did not say that as well as I could have ..." Everything is OK now, and the press can go back to swooning over his elegance.

Does Hillary get a do-over for anything she says? Not on your life. Not only does she not get to explain anything she says, but every comment made by her and Bill gets picked apart for hidden meaning.

Recently, Hillary laughed out loud at a dumb question by a reporter. David Shuster was immediately on television being offended by Hillary's lack of respect for the press. Yes, David, the Clinton's think the press are slime. Do you blame them?

The man is so eloquent his meaning is lost in a reading by a person with an agenda. There are a lot of folks with agendas on this comment line. All he is saying is that "we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more". He says clearly people have lost jobs and government support and don't trust any more so they seek comfort elsewhere; in their communities and their faith. McCain doesn't know the Shites from the Sunnis and wants a 100 year war in 6 month increments. Where is the money coming from?? China and Germany own us. Wake up people, this country is failing. Iraq has billions of oil dollars set aside and we the US taxpayers are financing the rebuilding of their infrastructure. The Bushs have been in bed with Saudia Arabia royalty for generations. Guess what, they're in the oil business. Ms Clinton is a politically ambitious liar. She is the same old, same old Washington folk. She is devisive unwiling to compromise. All this and you people are picking apart comments of transparent honesty and calling him an empty suit. My god, no one has spoken the truth in this campaign like Obama has. Are we so afraid of the truth that we will stone those who speak it. We are then no better than the crazies in the Middle East who make their women drape themselves in shrouds, perform female circumcisions and honor kill their daughters and wives. By the way, how many of you who are so willing to pick these comments apart read the Clinton supporters statement this is a response to? And how many of you have lost a job to down sizing or overseas withdrawal of companies. I live in NC and we are for Obama here. Look it up in the polls. We have lost millions of jobs to mills and industry moving out of the country. Clinton lied when she said she didn't support Nafta. Look it up. Fact check is a great source. How come you aren't picking apart McCain's speeches when he refers to Iran as a Sunni nation? It is Shia. Saudias are Sunni. He doesn't know one from the other. How come you all aren't picking apart Hillary when she lies about Nafta and the 1996 trip to Bosnia. Lots of lies there. She wasn't the first first lady to go into a war zone and she didn't run from sniper fire. She and McCain are pulling wool over your eyes. God help us!! We will need those guns and our own faith to make it out of this mess which apparently you all want to continue.

This is The Clinton's again..It goes on and on...They are so desperate.Obama is right and is facing the reality of issues..If she gets the nomination..I will write in Obama or not vote..I will continue my quest in moving to another country..Has anyone else had enough yet?

if you listen to the video of him in Indiana, he didn't say "Here's what rich Senator Clinton says..." as though he was addressing her 110 million dollars- he said "Here's what's rich (pause)- Senator Clinton says..."

brueso

Does your dear boy believe that, should he fix whatever core problems he thinks exists, the bitterness will go away and people will no longer need god? He seems to have real issues with other people's god compared to his own.

He DID explain what he meant by the 'cling to guns and religion'- he meant that since they don't vote for economic things anymore (since previous politicians have shown them nothing changes about that), they make their votes based on things like guns and religion. Does anyone really think Obama- who has been more upfront about his faith than anyone in this election season besides Huckabee- was mocking people for turning to religion? Not bloody likely. Look- if you don't support the guy, fine- but don't try to turn what he said into something else as a justification for it. If Clinton or McCain were actually looking out for the 'little man', they wouldn't be in the bag for lobbyists.

Why is this man running for president. He has divided Americans on their issues of patriotism, he has divided blacks against white, he now dividing rich against the poor, he has divided the jewish community , and his lists keeps getting longer as the days go by.

Obama and his wife seems very anti-American, for them America seems to have everything wrong with it, but yet the Obama's seem to be doing well.

How long are people just going to sit by and let him continuously, keep on separating people on a host of issues. Yes elections are a battle, buts its a battle between parties to find the right candidate for president, not what is going on now with Obama.

Obama seems to be fighting a personal battle with America and all its people, this type of division is not going to do any of us any good in the long run.

Hillary supporters:

Your candidate will loose to the liberal left. Here are your GE choices:

*Vote for McCain
*Vote for Nader
*Write in Hillary's name
*Dont' vote

You have been betrayed!!!!

Obama is right. People are bitter. I'm glad he recognizes that people are bitter in certain areas due to economic problems. This is the first step in trying to change the economic situation in those places. I come from such a place and we have little faith in the government being of any help to people willing and eager to work hard for decent wages to allow us to live a nice middle-class life. The government does not need to give welfare to the people in these areas, but, if they want to help those people, they can help us make it more attractive for businesses to operate there (and in the US in general) and more attractive to buy American. At least Obama realizes there is a problem and a huge wealth divide in the U.S. Too bad the other politicians don't focus on this very very important issue, but I guess that's politics.

Obama insulted, belittle put down and abuse the Backbone of this country.

I rarely post on these bulletin boards but read them quite often. It has been interesting to see the evolution of Obama-mania. I have looked at this from so many angles and I still don't get it.

I am a black woman, registered independent, from the south. While I am excited about the fact that a black man could actually be so close to winning the nomination, I wish it was someone who was actually qualified to do so. Every time I hear Obama speak I have flash backs to George Bush campaigning - a great guy to have a beer with, but essentially an empty suit. We've already been down the road with an inexperienced, untested, 'groomed by the party elite' candidate. The consequences have been undescribably damaging. Bush was not 'seasoned' enough to make his own decisions and wound up being a puppet doing the bidding of Cheney and co.Perhaps this is why the dem party elite want Obama to win. It seems that as Americans have not learned that lesson and are destined to repeat it.

I know the Clinton's have a lot of baggage, some brought upon themselves and some heaped upon them unfairly by the media (which by the way is SCARY the way the media have wielded so much influence in this election).

At the end of the day, I know the record of the Clintons, what they have stood for and the good works they've done. They are not perfect. It is not a crime for an ex-president to make money. Of the $109million, about $43million went towards taxes and charity. This leaves $66million over a ten year perod, still not chump change at $10million per year, but I don't think we should judge them for earning a living. I know bankers who earn more than that.

I guess this whole message is to focus on the issues. In my gut, I can not trust the future of my children to Obama. As an independant, I will either write in Hillary's name or vote for McCain should Obama be the nominee of the democratic party. I do not believev he is electable. I know it's futile to try and convince anyone on the boards to change their minds, but I wanted to put my thoughts out there.

Since much of the Republican party is characterized as pro-gun, pro-religion, and anti-immigration, is Obama really saying that the Republican party is bitter and frustrated? Is he saying that Republicans and conservative Democrats are sick? Is he saying that if they were not bitter and frustrated the skies would open up, light would shine down on them, and they would throw away their guns, stop going to church, and welcome immigrants with open arms? Is that what he believes?

When Obama wrongly says that people turn to religion out of bitterness and frustration we hear echoes of an earlier political theorist, Karl Marx, who said "Religion is the opiate of the people."

The only people that are "bitter"
are those that thought Obama had an IQ
over 50....

Thank Allah that he has now lost the
nomination!

Obama needs to shut up about guns, religion, and immigration. He is just digging himself a deeper hole. He has characterized people who are pro-gun, pro-religion, and anti-immigration as bitter and frustrated. In his attempt to explain himself is says that because of bitterness and frustration "people end up, you know, voting on issues like guns, and are they going to have the right to bear arms. They vote on issues like gay marriage. And they take refuge in their faith and their community and their families and things they can count on."

He does not seem to believe that people can support pro-gun or pro-religion causes without first being bitter and frustrated. This is just wrong. Lots of people are single issue voters. They are not political junkies who weigh all of the issues before them. This is not wrong, and it does not mean people focus on one issue out of bitterness and frustration.

Obama needs to stop digging this hole. He needs to shut up and stop trying to explain his first remark. He needs to say he was misquoted, drunk, sleep deprived, or whatever.

The father of a friend of mine would always say that a working man voting Republican is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders. Yet election after election blue collar voters pull the lever for the elephant. If you do not think that there is a nugget of truth in what Obama said (please read the whole quote, not just a couple of sentences) please explain why we keep shooting oursleves in the foot.