When was the last time David Broder wrote something that didn’t completely indulge his predetermined party outlook?  And what is it about him that the Washington Post feels adds to their bottom line?  I just don’t see it, he’s a cost without enough value.

One of the major questions about Obama, of whom so little is known

God, what a moron.  Even the nuttiest wingnut knows where Obama grew up, who his parents were, where they were from, etc.  How can people be arguing about whether or not Obama was “indoctrinated” as a child going to a Muslim school in Indonesia if they don’t know anything about him?

God, what a moron.

Exactly! I finally started watching on C-Span so I could actually watch the speeches instead of all the bloviators. Its funny you mention the paper being thrown in the bushes instead of the front porch- exactly the reason my Republican father stopped getting the New York Times.

So Obama isn’t that “Change” guy anymore.  He still appeals to Dems as much as he ever has mainly because of those early speeches, he’s got charisma. I think his seech was pretty good.  Sure he’s just another politician, but when you’re running for the big job you have to, well, become a politician.  If the wind blows left, you go left, if it blows right…you get the point.  Reps like to forget about McCain and his “shift” in thought (flip-flops).  No off shore drilling says McCain, wait, I mean, we need to drill.  McCain isn’t really a Maverick and Obama really isn’t about change, that shouldn’t be a shock or really even a disappointment to anyone remotely familiar with politics.  We like to lie to ourselves when it comes to “our guy”.  It’s easier to point out the failings of the other guy’s candidate than it is to accept the failings of yours.

Reagan’s skill was his rhetoric; hence the label “The Great Communicator.”

I’m so tired of this myth, too.  I don’t have the book at home (it’s at the office), but Neil Postman wrote during Reagan’s administration that Americans calling this president “the Great Communicator” despite the fact that most of what he said had little-to-no correspondence to reality was a sure sign that our culture was getting extremely stupid, extremely fast (I’m paraphrasing, but that’s the gist of it).

In fact, Reagan was a remarkably poor rhetorician, in the sense that a strong and valid argument requires logos, ethos, and pathos.  Reagan consistently got one out of the three (pathos), but usually failed at the other two.  That people thought that he seemed to know what he was talking about says more about his skills as a thespian than it does about his skills in argumentation.

The only time a new president can really change Washington is when he makes it the central message of his campaign, as Ronald Reagan did in 1980.

If Broder’s next column complains that Obama is merely campaigning on “Hope” and “Change,” can I punch him in the face?

So Obama isn’t that “Change” guy anymore.

Like I said in that other thread, Jason, I think you just don’t understand what “change” was intended to mean. Just based on his policies alone we stand to see significant departure from the “classic” Republican and Democratic policies.

I mean, otherwise what was all the carping during the primary about? Remember? “Who has the most Democratic health care plan”?

He’s still the change guy, he’s still the hope guy; indeed, I’m even more hopeful because he’s proven himself to be someone who won’t let his public persona be too idealistic to actually win an election. The best place to start the change, after all, is from the highest office in the land.

I’m so sick of David Broder.  For decades now he has attended Georgetown dinner parties where he is informed, along with the likes of Cokie Roberts and George Will, of what the American people think.  The day he finally retires will be a good day.

He is the most pathetic example of out of touch I can think of.  And apparently he didn’t even bother to look at any evidence to see how Obama’s acceptance speech was viewed by the one quarter of households in the United States who watched it.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109948/Obama-Acceptance-Speech-Gets-High-Marks-From-Public.aspx

Jesse,

You say Obama will listen to the other side without branding them traitors. But speaking as a British socialist, what strikes me about Obama is that his response to anybody who challenges or questions him is to brand them racist. Add to that the difficulty he has telling the truth about his bigamist father who, far from being the poor goat boy of Obama’s myth-making was a wealthy and high ranking Government official, the son of a wealthy Kenyan farmer who could afford to give 14 cows (have you any idea how rich in Kenyan terms is a man who can spare 14 cows even now?) to mollify the outraged family of a young woman Barak Snr. had violated. Senior had to marry that girl and was still married to her when he impregnated Stanley Anne Dunham. And he was still married to both her and Anne when he impregnated and married his third wife.

The legitimate Obama family back in Kenya are affluent (by Kenyan standards, well educated and Muslim.) speak excellent English and are very willing to talk, the impoverished half - brother George who surfaced a few weeks ago is the son of Barak Obama Snr. by one of his several mistresses. But that story would not play as well to the voters of the mid west as the goat boy routine did I guess.

So this guy is the “new” face of American politics is he? And what did he mean by change, that he will rewrite the nation’s history as he has rewritten his own?

I was telling my Democrat activist friends the party should dump Obama before the convention and go with Hillary. She would have been halfway through the White House door by now.

BTW don’t ak me about the “birth certificate” story, I know nothing of that. Obama’s version of his “Kenyan background” did not make any sense to British reporters aware of that country’s recent history and until the early 1960s Kenya was a British colony so it was easy for our news organisations to check things out. They were right, Barry’s version of events is pure fantasy.

But speaking as a British socialist, what strikes me about Obama is that his response to anybody who challenges or questions him is to brand them racist.

I challenge you to present even a single example where Barack Obama has responded to a criticism by calling the questioner a racist. In fact I challenge you to present even one example where Barack Obama calls any specific person a racist.

I was telling my Democrat activist friends the party should dump Obama before the convention and go with Hillary.

Speaking as an American voter, you haven’t got the first fucking clue what you’re talking about.

One of the major questions about Obama, of whom so little is known . . . .

Said the newspaper reporter. I’m sick to death of this line. He’s been on the national stage since his speech at the 2004 convention and has been the subject of almost non-stop coverage since, what, mid 2006? Obama doesn’t exactly live in an underground bunker at an undisclosed location or have a secret identity for use when fighting crime. Moreover, Broder’s job, supposedly, is to find things out.

It puts me in mind of an old Southernism, used to (ostensibly) politely say that someone wasn’t and wouldn’t ever be in the speaker’s social class: “He’s perfectly nice, but I just don’t know his family.”

And yes, I’m calling Broder a racist. More specifically, he’s advancing ideas of otherness and mysteriousness that have no basis in fact (we really do know a lot about Obama) but reinforce racist ideas about the otherness and mysteriousness of non-white people.

“Add to that the difficulty he has telling the truth about his bigamist father who, far from being the poor goat boy of Obama’s myth-making was a wealthy and high ranking Government official”

The story of Obama Sr.‘s life is that as a child he herded his family’s livestock.  That is what little boys do in that part of Kenya.  The grown men do the farming, the women and girls take care of the home and little boys tend the livestock.  Those same boys sometimes grow up to go to university on scholarship and then become government officials, as Obama Sr. did.  The fact of his later success does not erase his humble beginnings.

“the son of a wealthy Kenyan farmer who could afford to give 14 cows (have you any idea how rich in Kenyan terms is a man who can spare 14 cows even now?)”

Plenty of middle income families have cows by the dozens.  My husband grew up in a family with around twenty-some cows (which he herded as a child before growing up to be a personal trainer living in the US - imagine!  someone whose adult occupation is not what they did as a child!).  In that part of the country the farming is pretty good and is the main way that people support themselves.  They keep livestock to basically diversify their investments in case a drought or disease wipes out the crop and also as a savings account to sell for some quick cash is there is an emergency or special circumstance like a wedding where a gift or dowry is required.  The fact of having some expendable cows does not prove some sort of fabulous wealth. 

I am getting really tired of people pulling supposed expertise about Kenya out of their asses and hoping that nobody who actually know anything about the place comes along to call them on it.

It’s gonna be a LONG election for me.

So this guy is the “new” face of American politics is he? And what did he mean by change, that he will rewrite the nation’s history as he has rewritten his own?</i.

Hell, by that standard Hillary should never have even been allowed to run since she was actually <i>married to a cheater of her own free will.  And Chelsea should be barred from all elective office—after all, her father was an asshole who very publicly cheated on her mother, so clearly Chelsea is an untrustworthy person, too.

BTW don’t ak me about the “birth certificate” story, I know nothing of that.

Since even World Net Daily has given up and admitted that the birth certificate from Hawaii that was shown to them is in fact authentic and Obama is a US citizen, yes, it’s pretty clear you know nothing at all.  But thanks for taking up our time with your ignorant blatherings.

D’oh!  Preview is my friend.  Obviously, first graf above is idiot Ian’s, the second two are mine.