The Two Obamas

[Tab]

God, Republicans are saps. They think that they?re running against some academic liberal who wouldn?t wear flag pins on his lapel, whose wife isn?t proud of America and who went to some liberationist church where the pastor damned his own country. They think they?re running against some naïve university-town dreamer, the second coming of Adlai Stevenson.

But as recent weeks have made clear, Barack Obama is the most split-personality politician in the country today. On the one hand, there is Dr. Barack, the high-minded, Niebuhr-quoting speechifier who spent this past winter thrilling the Scarlett Johansson set and feeling the fierce urgency of now. But then on the other side, there?s Fast Eddie Obama, the promise-breaking, tough-minded Chicago pol who?d throw you under the truck for votes.

This guy is the whole Chicago package: an idealistic, lakefront liberal fronting a sharp-elbowed machine operator. He?s the only politician of our lifetime who is underestimated because he?s too intelligent. He speaks so calmly and polysyllabically that people fail to appreciate the Machiavellian ambition inside.

But he?s been giving us an education, for anybody who cares to pay attention. Just try to imagine Mister Rogers playing the agent Ari in ?Entourage? and it all falls into place.

NYT - The Two Obamas

I think beyond a doubt the first paragraph should be considered the word of God. Obama had a press conference earlier and everyone was making plans for January comes - Obama will win this election.

The only thing I don't understand is what was Obama's previous life? Why did he sell it out for this?

 

[hellod9]

Originally posted by: Tab
The only thing I don't understand is what was Obama's previous life? Why did he sell it out for this?

When someone commits their entire mind and body...all of their mental, physical, and spiritual energy...to pushing themselves to the limit...to seeing how far they are capabable going...how quickly they can grow, learn, and achieve more and more...they are not selling out. Yes, they may be seen as selfish, machiavellian, or even as a 'sell-out', but I simply see them as taking life by the horns to the fullest extent possible...

Watching that person from the outside is often very difficult to understand.

 

[Butterbean]

"He speaks so calmly and polysyllabically that people fail to appreciate the Machiavellian ambition inside."

Not everyone - just the hope-a-dopes (or blacks and egg-heads as Paul Bagalla called them)



I was just reading about his canceled public financing pledge and all the rhetoric about financing from "the ground up" and freedom from insider money but Obama is rolling in it

McCain Top Ten Donors:

Merrill Lynch $230,310
Citigroup Inc $219,551
Blank Rome LLP $189,226
Greenberg Traurig LLP $157,487
AT&T Inc $153,005
Goldman Sachs $139,520
Morgan Stanley $136,651
JPMorgan Chase & Co $129,400
Credit Suisse Group $110,725
Lehman Brothers $96,050
UBS AG $93,815
US Government $91,551
Bank of New York Mellon $87,500
IDT Corp $83,150
Blackstone Group $82,600
Bear Stearns $79,900
Wachovia Corp $76,725
MGM Mirage $76,050
Univision Communications $75,700
PricewaterhouseCoopers $71,050



Obama Top Ten Donors:

Goldman Sachs $571,330
University of California $437,236
UBS AG $364,806
JPMorgan Chase & Co $362,207
Citigroup Inc $358,054
National Amusements Inc $320,750
Lehman Brothers $318,647
Google Inc $309,514
Harvard University $309,025
Sidley Austin LLP $294,245
Skadden, Arps et al $270,013
Time Warner $262,677
Morgan Stanley $259,876
Jones Day $250,725
Exelon Corp $236,211
University of Chicago $218,857
Wilmerhale LLP $218,680
Latham & Watkins $218,615
Microsoft Corp $209,242
Stanford University $195,262


Obama complians about McCain 527's when his has gobs more money:

While Sen. Obama said such groups were aiding Sen. McCain's campaign, he didn't note that they are lining up to support him as well. Through Thursday, independent political groups supporting Sen. Obama had spent $15.3 million, while independent groups supporting Sen. McCain had spent only $1.1 million, federal campaign-finance records show.

http://online.wsj.com/article/...?mod=hpp_us_whats_news


Its no wonder he had a top insider resign:

CHICAGO ? James A. Johnson, the consummate Washington insider whom Senator Barack Obama tapped to head his vice-presidential search effort, resigned abruptly on Wednesday to try to silence a growing furor over his business activities.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06...s/politics/12veep.html

 

[bamacre]

Because Bush has been so bad, Obama cannot do any wrong.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: bamacre
Because Bush has been so bad, Obama cannot do any wrong.

This.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: bamacre
Because Bush has been so bad, Obama cannot do any wrong.

I like Obama and I plan on voting for him - he essentially has a blank check. Bush and The Republican Party have sucked so bad for the past eight years he can do whatever...

 

[PELarson]

Barack H. Obama = Harry S. Truman

Both highly intelligent and both came up through a political machine system relatively untouched.

We will have to wait to see if he lives up to his potential.

But after the last 8 years all I want is a good President and McCain ain't it. Barr has potential.

 

[Bowfinger]

Just for the record, this is not an NYT article. It is an Op-ed by David Brooks, a regular Obama critic and conservative McCain supporter. Take it with an appropriate helping of salt.

 

[jpeyton]

The warning flags for Republicans should have went up a while ago. Even the most ardent anti-Obamaphyte will admit that he's a political genius; the guy is literally the Teflon don from Chicago.

He beat the Clintons on their home court. His campaign has redefined the political landscape; small-donor fund-raising, grass-roots campaigning, online political networking...things that others have tried, but he has managed to sharpen into a unbeatable political weapon. A no-name African-American junior senator from Illinois, in the few short months since the primary season began, has become the new de facto leader of the Democratic party and the heavy front-runner for the general election.

Brilliant.

 

[ayabe]

I dunno Truman was not academically smart, more of a street smart kind of guy.

IIRC Truman was the last president we've had who didn't graduate high school.

Obama is both.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Just for the record, this is not an NYT article. It is an Op-ed by David Brooks, a regular Obama critic and conservative McCain supporter. Take it with an appropriate helping of salt.

Where is your argument when words in the OP come from someone who doesn't like McCain?

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: hellod9

When someone commits their entire mind and body...all of their mental, physical, and spiritual energy...to pushing themselves to the limit...to seeing how far they are capabable going...how quickly they can grow, learn, and achieve more and more...they are not selling out. Yes, they may be seen as selfish, machiavellian, or even as a 'sell-out', but I simply see them as taking life by the horns to the fullest extent possible...

Watching that person from the outside is often very difficult to understand.

Sounds like someone I would like to be my president.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
The warning flags for Republicans should have went up a while ago. Even the most ardent anti-Obamaphyte will admit that he's a political genius; the guy is literally the Teflon don from Chicago.

that might not be the best "literally" comparison you want to make for the candidate who's opening the teamsters back up to the mob

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teflon_don

 

[OrByte]

All I know for sure is that this guy is no liberal goo-goo. Republicans keep calling him naïve. But naïve is the last word I?d use to describe Barack Obama. He?s the most effectively political creature we?ve seen in decades. Even Bill Clinton wasn?t smart enough to succeed in politics by pretending to renounce politics.


quoted here because it is worth mentioning. Obama's detractors are the ones calling him Obamessiah, or Jesus, or the second coming, all in an attempt to dismiss him and his supporters. And then you hear McCains campaign calling Obama naive, or inexperienced.

As an Obama supporter I don't buy into any of that. It is clear that Obama is intelligent, and that he is a politician, but most importantly, his support and his political locomotive cannot be dismissed. People on the otherside haven't pegged him correctly yet and that is going to hurt their chances in this election. Obama is running circles around everyone.

 

[PELarson]

Originally posted by: ayabe
I dunno Truman was not academically smart, more of a street smart kind of guy.

IIRC Truman was the last president we've had who didn't graduate high school.

Obama is both.

Truman may not have finished College, two years of law school, but he is one of the most intelligent Presidents we ever had.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: PELarson

Originally posted by: ayabe
I dunno Truman was not academically smart, more of a street smart kind of guy.

IIRC Truman was the last president we've had who didn't graduate high school.

Obama is both.

Truman may not have finished College, two years of law school, but he is one of the most intelligent Presidents we ever had.

:thumbsup:

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: OrByte

quoted here because it is worth mentioning. Obama's detractors are the ones calling him Obamessiah, or Jesus, or the second coming, all in an attempt to dismiss him and his supporters. And then you hear McCains campaign calling Obama naive, or inexperienced.

it seems to me like they're doing that whole "attack your opponents strongest point" thing.

Obama is trying to run as something new, post-partisan, above politics, etc... the republicans are making a concerted effort to build him up so that every time he chooses political expediency over principle, they can try and make it look that much worse in comparison.

 

[bamacre]

I hope Obama will be a good president, because he will be president.

But I fear that he will not. And if this becomes reality, there's going to be a much larger group of apologists around here. I imagine we'll often hear "well, what was I supposed to do, vote for McCain?"

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Just for the record, this is not an NYT article. It is an Op-ed by David Brooks, a regular Obama critic and conservative McCain supporter. Take it with an appropriate helping of salt.

Where is your argument when words in the OP come from someone who doesn't like McCain?

1. For example?

2. I didn't make an argument. I pointed out a matter of fact.

3. What's your point?

I don't believe I've ever pretended to not be an Obama supporter. While I don't find him to be a perfect candidate -- far from it -- he's probably the most promising Republicrat nominee I've seen in decades. I expect him to have my vote in November unless I discover an exceptional third-party candidate.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: jpeyton
The warning flags for Republicans should have went up a while ago. Even the most ardent anti-Obamaphyte will admit that he's a political genius; the guy is literally the Teflon don from Chicago.

that might not be the best "literally" comparison you want to make for the candidate who's opening the teamsters back up to the mob

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teflon_don

This is the second time you've mentioned that, and yes, I'm well-versed in Mafia lore. I know where the term "Teflon Don" came from, and as bamacre mentioned above, Democrats and Independents really don't care about Obama's misgivings (he has called himself an "imperfect" candidate on multiple occasions). That's why nothing sticks.

He's suave enough I may start calling him The Dapper Don.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
The warning flags for Republicans should have went up a while ago. Even the most ardent anti-Obamaphyte will admit that he's a political genius; the guy is literally the Teflon don from Chicago.

He beat the Clintons on their home court. His campaign has redefined the political landscape; small-donor fund-raising, grass-roots campaigning, online political networking...things that others have tried, but he has managed to sharpen into a unbeatable political weapon. A no-name African-American junior senator from Illinois, in the few short months since the primary season began, has become the new de facto leader of the Democratic party and the heavy front-runner for the general election.

Brilliant.

1. He barely beat the Clinton's. And as some astute political types have pointed out he only beat her because of how the states lined up. Move PA, WV and KY up a month and Maryland, Virginia and Wisconsin back a month and Hillary is most likely the nominee.

2. A no-name senator who just happened to give the key note speech at the 2004 convention...

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: bamacre
I hope Obama will be a good president, because he will be president.

But I fear that he will not. And if this becomes reality, there's going to be a much larger group of apologists around here. I imagine we'll often hear "well, what was I supposed to do, vote for McCain?"

Everyone here is voting for what they believe is the best man for the job in order to bring this country to its finest. Let's hope that the outcome this time around will be more promising. After we cast our votes, there is little more that we can do.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Just for the record, this is not an NYT article. It is an Op-ed by David Brooks, a regular Obama critic and conservative McCain supporter. Take it with an appropriate helping of salt.

Where is your argument when words in the OP come from someone who doesn't like McCain?

1. For example?

2. I didn't make an argument. I pointed out a matter of fact.

3. What's your point?

I don't believe I've ever pretended to not be an Obama supporter. While I don't find him to be a perfect candidate -- far from it -- he's probably the most promising Republicrat nominee I've seen in decades. I expect him to have my vote in November unless I discover an exceptional third-party candidate.

What don't you like about him? Be specific, I am quite interested in what you have to say.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
1. He barely beat the Clinton's. And as some astute political types have pointed out he only beat her because of how the states lined up. Move PA, WV and KY up a month and Maryland, Virginia and Wisconsin back a month and Hillary is most likely the nominee.

2. A no-name senator who just happened to give the key note speech at the 2004 convention...

All things considered, Obama barely beating Clinton is one hell of a political accomplishment which takes a great deal of understanding about how the political game and campaigning works. He may be a young no-name senator, but he is no amature.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
1. He barely beat the Clinton's.

He beat someone who expected her coronation as the nominee by everyone, including myself. It's like an expansion team beating the World Champs; a stunning defeat by any margin.

And as some astute political types have pointed out he only beat her because of how the states lined up. Move PA, WV and KY up a month and Maryland, Virginia and Wisconsin back a month and Hillary is most likely the nominee.

So he actually read the calendar and the rule book? Thank God we nominated the literate candidate.