George W. Obama

BhO plays the typical dirty Chicagoan politics, as he did when he first became a state senator, by pushing away his opponents simply not counting and discarding votes.

Now he got his Affirmative Action confirmation, he is pretending moving to the center to fool the fools.

Sounds like a perfect phony combination!

BhO is asking the American people to gamble on him like they did on WGB. WGO is and will be no better.

Soetoro No!

I am quite a bit smarter than someone who would be bamboozled by the likes of you.

I have actually read the policies.

I have actually gone and heard these people speak. I hav eheard them try to explain their "math" on these issues.

It is not a question of obama people being bamboozled...

it's more the likes of people like you who don't read.

or read and watch the 30 second soundbite of only the things you want to hear.

McCain back a year ago was often playing up his honesty by saying he was not a numbers guy. ...and that Iran was a lot of his talk. He was a hawk...he is a hawk.

Obama had way to much ability to talk and answer questions (the likes of Dodd and Biden as far as logic and had obviously had a grasp on complexity of the issues)

so no...I have not been bamboozled...

and some of us who have been through that will not people like yourself bamboozle the country...

not after Bush was allowed to do it in 2000 and 2004..

Soetoro No!

There is a difference between what Obama is saying and what Bush was doing.

Obama said in the speech...the activities that this funds must not be "pitch sessions for the religion" ...
that it had to be used for secular activities.

He also said that his idea is to open that to include secular groups that are neighborhood initiatives.

Bush was to give moneys to churches.

Obama's proposal is to give money to the church's secular activities...and to other secular groups activities.

"It is taking the bad idea...and making it better"

that is called working with everyone's ideas...

and Bush rode to power on the backs on exclusion and religion...that is not what this is.

If you can wade through the snark here, you’ll find that Maureen Dowd has an insightful description of Obama — passive, scared, not in control, and ultimately weak. She writes: He gives the impression of someone who would like to kid around with reporters for a minute, but knows he’s going to be peppered with on-the-record [...]

NO BO, period! ..most of us know him as the "Pied Piper", a person that offers others strong, yet delusive enticement in order to get votes, makes promises irresponsibly...NO, BO is not qualified for the office he wants; he's woefully lacking in all the skills & experience needed for the most demanding job on the planet...and then there are the many unanswered questions about his personal past, his business associates, the private sources of his mountains of cash, et al., etc.

dl

Don't look now but you've been bamboozled.

Candidates do have the right to change his mind. I do on some issues. The question is WHY? I.e. Is Obama moving to the center just to gain votes and will simply swing back to the left in December while mumbling to himself "I got you fooled."? The press needs to dig deeper on the issue and inform voters.

no kiki

Obama did not "bamboozle" lol the country.

Read his policies...which none of you have obviously done.

there is no bamboozle here.

The bamboozle is when people don't look at the facts and then argue like that.

Read his healthcare policy...go look at what he has said on all of these issues...

he has been consistent but people who half-listen and or are looking to jump on something that taken out of a soundbite you could spin against...

this is all bologne.

McCain has been the one that over two years has completely changed his stance on half of the issues facing us.

that is fact.

Nader is the only sensible vote if you really want meaningful change in the Washington corruption.

Obama: Living proof that you can fool some of the people all of the time.

Belle Starr i agree a vote for nader is not a wasted vote, it is a vote against the politics of lies, deception, corruption, and manipulation. it is the only REAL vote for change.

Obama bambozzled this country, he must be stopped.

When ANY political aspirant says

"It can be the foundation of a new project of American renewal and that's the kind of effort I intend to lead as president of the United States."

the citizenry must BEWARE.

Saying that domestic problems are beyond solving without . . . a religious revival with The One as "charismatic leader" just. truly. sucks.

It is exactly fascism, soft fascism with a happy face, wrapped in a flag pin and the wire-tapping of every single citizen.

What in the world is Jesse Jackson (Senior, I mean) going to say at the convention? Now that his endorsee has backed off any pretense of social "change"?

Viable=electable, and we've all had our coffee.

And today we learned that BHO got a very favorable loan rate for his Chicago mansion to go along with the sweetheart deal he got from the Rezkos. His middle name should be 'dirty'. Why do some people have an affinity to such people ala OJ?

"I'd like my vote to go into a viable candidate and choose who I think will make America a better country for my children to grow up in."

If there's really a voters' strike against the Democrats, "viable" takes on a whole new meaning.

What's "viable" about a candidate whose most obvious committment to "change" is in his own positions -- on domestic surveillance, on the Iraq invasion, Social Security, health care, transportation, energy.

This guy is a fraud. He's cute-LOOKING -- if you don't actually listen to him speak to specifics more challenging than "change" -- but he's a fraud.

Or maybe just chicken to mention what kind of "change" -- other than funding what amounts to state religion -- he and his Democratic handlers envision?

They're all zillionaires, our congress -- with book deals and summer houses, and with every little medical test and dental attention paid for by the public in general.

Maybe the politicians should just SELL the armed forces, outright, to Blackwater or whoever -- and see if it can apply itself to DOMESTIC matters: housing, health care, energy, transportation.

In California, look at years-long brush accumulation -- some of it burning, some of it waiting to burn.

Not a bad slate, dl. The important missing piece is the party platform. The slate has to reflect the stated objectives or the business case won't make sense. He has to prove that this is not just about winning but serving and governing. Right now he is letting the number crunchers run the campaign. That focus on short terms will defocus the presentation. He needs a presentation with plenty of white space in the bullet list that clearly shows how one objective works with the next and how his proposed team has strengths that apply to each objective.

Clarity inspires confidence. Confidence begets strong response.
Strong response begets managable change.

Belle Star, fair enough, I'm no fan of the party myself. I'd love to go third party (Libertarian, but Barr is a joke) but I've got to choose between McCain and Obama because I'd like my vote to go into a viable candidate and choose who I think will make America a better country for my children to grow up in. Obama turns my stomach but McCain removes it from my body.

"a vote for Nader... is a vote against this country and a waste of your greatest duty as a citizen."

NO one should recognize a "duty" to vote for a hothouse mobster just because he's part "black".