Okay, so Chris Matthews was a bit of a jerk. But the question he asked was spot on, I think.
Obama is all about promises, but what has he done in the time he's actually been in the Senate? I mean, his colleague in the Senate and supporter of his campaign couldn't even think of a single thing.
He seems like a soap bubble. All shiny and pretty on the outside, but on the inside... well, nothing of substance. It says something really tragic about this country that a man with no background or accomplishments in government has gotten so much support in his quest for the presidency.
posted
Interestingly, the senator from Texas offered an apology the next morning that then listed those of Obama's accomplishments he'd failed to remember. It was rather gracefully done, IMO.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It seems to me, then, that Obama should be just the candidate for you libertarian types. He won't do anything! Just what you want in a government, no?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
1) Winning a modern National Primary without traditional negative campaigning. 2) Winning a modern national Primary by appealing to the masses rather than entrenched special interest groups. 3) Winning an Illinois Democratic senatorial seat after being denied Daley's endorsement and with only a modest personal fortune. 4) Making people feel good about engaged American civic life and the possibilities of their America government being a good and just one. 5) Raising the tone for ethical conduct within the Senate.
I'm not saying that he couldn't have done more, but I think he leads more by example than by the force and threat of law. I am saying that while his example is not perfect, it is commendable.
posted
As I recall, he's also co-sponsored several bills that got passed--which is quite a feat for a junior senator who shouldn't have any political clout. He's not a do-nothing, but he also hasn't had a lot of time in the senate to build up the record that some of these guys have.
Posts: 3658 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: It seems to me, then, that Obama should be just the candidate for you libertarian types. He won't do anything! Just what you want in a government, no?
quote:It says something really tragic about this country that a man with no background or accomplishments in government has gotten so much support in his quest for the presidency.
I would think it says that Americans believe finding a good President is less about having a great resume of political accomplishments and more about having character, good judgement, and the ability to lead. Or, perhaps it says that Americans are willing to take a risk on someone with less experience in government, in order to get someone who is new enough to the system that we think he can be trusted to change the way things are done in D.C. I don't see how either is tragic.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
IIRC Abraham Lincoln had spent very little time in the legislature before making his bid for the presidency. He also contributed very little in terms of gross numbers of legislation.
I could be wrong but I'm going to look into that.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, the accomplishments Kirk Watson lists on his blog page do seem pretty good for someone who's been in the Senate only as long as Obama has been. But are being on a nuclear weapons committee and working on procedural matters such as ethics and budget transparency really sufficient experience to be president? Well, maybe when I look at John McCain's record I'll find that it doesn't show much more than that he's been in the Senate a long time, and that therefore their records are about even.
Also, the fact that he tells the common people what they want to hear (and thereby wins primaries without negative campaigning) doesn't mean anything to me. Everyone who runs for president tries to do that.
Posts: 781 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It says something really tragic about this country that a man with no background or accomplishments in government has gotten so much support in his quest for the presidency.
I think it's more tragic that I hear people saying this who voted for George W. Bush.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: Hogwash. I’ve been hearing this more and more lately: Obama is all talk, everything he says is vague, he never talks details, we don’t know what he offers…and on and on. Not only is it crap. The opposite is true: there is much more meat to Obama’s platform than Clinton’s, and I’ll prove it.
Now, before I begin, I want to say that I’m neither a Clinton fan nor an Obama fan (nor McCain, for that matter). My candidate dropped out long ago. Like that candidate, I worship facts and I despise catchy slogans that belie the truth. Vote for whomever you want. Just make sure your vote isn’t influenced by a lie.
That said, let’s begin.
quote: Looking at this, it’s clear who is offering more details on their plans. Whether those plans are good, I’m not evaluating. I’m simply trying to debunk this myth that Obama is not offering details, and is instead simply a great orator. Why is this myth being propagated? Probably because he is a great orator.
quote: But I do follow legislation, at least on some issues, and I have been surprised by how often Senator Obama turns up, sponsoring or co-sponsoring really good legislation on some topic that isn't wildly sexy, but does matter. His bills tend to have the following features: they are good and thoughtful bills that try to solve real problems; they are in general not terribly flashy; and they tend to focus on achieving solutions acceptable to all concerned, not by compromising on principle, but by genuinely trying to craft a solution that everyone can get behind.
His legislation is often proposed with Republican co-sponsorship, which brings me to another point: he is bipartisan in a good way. According to me, bad bipartisanship is the kind practiced by Joe Lieberman. Bad bipartisans are so eager to establish credentials for moderation and reasonableness that they go out of their way to criticize their (supposed) ideological allies and praise their (supposed) opponents. They also compromise on principle, and when their opponents don't reciprocate, they compromise some more, until over time their positions become indistinguishable from those on the other side.
This isn't what Obama does. Obama tries to find people, both Democrats and Republicans, who actually care about a particular issue enough to try to get the policy right, and then he works with them. This does not involve compromising on principle. It does, however, involve preferring getting legislation passed to having a spectacular battle. (This is especially true when one is in the minority party, especially in this Senate: the chances that Obama's bills will actually become law increase dramatically when he has Republican co-sponsors.)
So my little data point is: while Obama has not proposed his Cosmic Plan for World Peace, he has proposed a lot of interesting legislation on important but undercovered topics. I can't remember another freshman Senator who so routinely pops up when I'm doing research on some non-sexy but important topic, and pops up because he has proposed something genuinely good. Since I think that American politics doesn't do nearly enough to reward people who take a patient, craftsmanlike attitude towards legislation, caring as much about fixing the parts that no one will notice until they go wrong as about the flashy parts, I wanted to say this. Specifics below the fold.
quote:I refuse to buy into the hype, on either side, but especially on that of Obama. However the "empty rhetoric" v. "history of accomplishments" arguments have prompted me to check it out on my own, not relying on any candidate's website, book, or worst of all supporters' diaries, like this one [link].
I went to the Library of Congress Website. The FACTS of what each did in the Senate last year sure surprised me. I'm sure they will surprise you, too. Whether you love or hate Hillary, you will be surprised. Whether you think Obama is the second coming of JFK or an inexperienced lightweight, you will surprised. Go check out the Library of Congress Website.
...
I looked up Obama and looked up Clinton. I looked at the bills that they both authored and introduced. Anyone who has been around politics, and is honest, realizes that there are a lot of reasons why a Senator votes one way or another on bills or misses votes. However an examination of the bills that each of these Senators cared enough about to author and introduce revealed much to me: what they care about, what their priorities are, how they tackle problems. And the list of co-sponsors showed something about how they lead, inspire and work with others. Finally, looking at which bills actually passed is pretty indicative of how effective each would be at getting things done.
And then she goes into the details. It's a good read.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: Some of his accomplishments:
1) Winning a modern National Primary without traditional negative campaigning. 2) Winning a modern national Primary by appealing to the masses rather than entrenched special interest groups. 3) Winning an Illinois Democratic senatorial seat after being denied Daley's endorsement and with only a modest personal fortune. 4) Making people feel good about engaged American civic life and the possibilities of their America government being a good and just one. 5) Raising the tone for ethical conduct within the Senate.
I'm not saying that he couldn't have done more, but I think he leads more by example than by the force and threat of law. I am saying that while his example is not perfect, it is commendable.
That's like saying someone is a good student because he's a good test taker.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wasn't too impressed with Irami's list either, but several other people have brought up some impressive accomplishments for Barack Obama. It seems like perhaps your initial assessment of him as having no background or accomplishments was incorrect.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa, I'm curious, given your supported candidate, what has Ron Paul accomplished in his career in government?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's like saying someone is a good student because he's a good test taker.
Lisa, the point is moot. Have you looked at any of the links posted? He has quite the list of accomplishments considering that amount of time he's been in the senate.
Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's like saying someone is a good student because he's a good test taker.
I think it's closer to saying that someone is a good student because putting him/her in class somehow makes everyone else behave better. It's still not the traditional answer, but it's not a small issue.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Irami Osei-Frimpong, the first three "accomplishments" you list involve campaigning for office. Not really accomplishments.
Your last two accomplishments you listed were:
quote:4) Making people feel good about engaged American civic life and the possibilities of their America government being a good and just one.
5) Raising the tone for ethical conduct within the Senate.
Those sound pretty vague. What exactly did he DO to "make people feel good..." and HOW EXACTLY did he go about "Raising the tone for ethical conduct..."?
I'm still looking for accomplishments. Maybe some of those bills Threads listed that Obama co-sponsored? (I would consider his consistent opposition to the war in Iraq from the very beginning to be evidence of poor judgment. Virtually all his Democratic colleagues agreed to the invasion of Iraq at the beginning. And Saddam was overtrown, and things are finally settling down and moving toward civilized order in Iraq, and the terrorists have suffered catastrophic defeat, by their own admissions.)
In all fairness, as has been pointed out, Obama is only a junior senator with no seniority, so has had little opportunity to do anything of consequence. Junior senators are not made chairs of committees. But then again, this only serves to underscore the basic criticism that he lacks experience. This becomes painfully embarassing when his brief neophyte "record" is compared to the decades of service, serving on key committees, and sponsoring of major bills, we see in the record of Senator McCain.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since the "get off your ass and do some reading" seems to be rolling off certain duck's backs,
quote:Obama's Success: S.AMDT.1041 to S.1082 To improve the safety and efficacy of genetic tests. S.AMDT.3073 to H.R.1585 To provide for transparency and accountability in military and security contracting. S.AMDT.3078 to H.R.1585 Relating to administrative separations of members of the Armed Forces for personality disorder. S.AMDT.41 to S.1 To require lobbyists to disclose the candidates, leadership PACs, or political parties for whom they collect or arrange contributions, and the aggregate amount of the contributions collected or arranged. S.AMDT.524 to S.CON.RES.21 To provide $100 million for the Summer Term Education Program supporting summer learning opportunities for low-income students in the early grades to lessen summer learning losses that contribute to the achievement gaps separating low-income students from their middle-class peers. S.AMDT.599 to S.CON.RES.21 To add $200 million for Function 270 (Energy) for the demonstration and monitoring of carbon capture and sequestration technology by the Department of Energy. S.AMDT.905 to S.761 To require the Director of Mathematics, Science, and Engineering Education to establish a program to recruit and provide mentors for women and underrepresented minorities who are interested in careers in mathematics, science, and engineering. S.AMDT.923 to S.761 To expand the pipeline of individuals entering the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields to support United States innovation and competitiveness. S.AMDT.924 to S.761 To establish summer term education programs. S.AMDT.2519 to H.R.2638 To provide that one of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5 million or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee certifies in writing to the agency awarding the contract or grant that the contractor or grantee owes no past due Federal tax liability. S.AMDT.2588 to H.R.976 To provide certain employment protections for family members who are caring for members of the Armed Forces recovering from illnesses and injuries incurred on active duty. S.AMDT.2658 to H.R.2642 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability. S.AMDT.2692 to H.R.2764 To require a comprehensive nuclear threat reduction and security plan. S.AMDT.2799 to H.R.3074 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability. S.AMDT.3137 to H.R.3222 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability. S.AMDT.3234 to H.R.3093 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability. S.AMDT.3331 to H.R.3043 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability. Senate Resolutions Passed: S.RES.133 : A resolution celebrating the life of Bishop Gilbert Earl Patterson. S.RES.268 : A resolution designating July 12, 2007, as "National Summer Learning Day".
If you want a translation, read the frequin' link.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
What are you doing, citing his voting record? So he raised his hand (or pressed the button, or whatever), along party lines mostly, on the liberal side of most issues, and much of it tedius technicalities.
Look, Pooka, be honest: When Obama faces McCain in debates, do you really think that Obama is going to bring up his "accomplishments"? To McCain?
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Edited to quote original text for response:
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: What are you doing, citing his voting record? So he raised his hand (or pressed the button, or whatever), along party lines mostly, on the liberal side of most issues, and much of it tedius technicalities.
Look, Pooka, be honest: When Obama faces McCain in debates, do you really think that Obama is going to bring up his "accomplishments"? To McCain?
Introduced. Got passed. Not just voted along with. Much longer list.
posted
It is purely honorific who gets to read a bill into record. How many of them did he author? How many of them were his original ideas? That is what it takes to be an accomplishment.
Would you seriously compare any of this to McCain's record of real accomplishments--bills he did author, that were his ideas, over decades of service?
Please remember, Obama is a junior senator. What do you expect? Why try to manufacture something?
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: It is purely honorific who gets to read a bill into record. How many of them did he author? How many of them were his original ideas? That is what it takes to be an accomplishment.
[edited afterward by the original poster to add:]
Would you seriously compare any of this to McCain's record of real accomplishments--bills he did author, that were his ideas, over decades of service?
Please remember, Obama is a junior senator. What do you expect? Why try to manufacture something?
Try again--see if you can imagine Obama facing McCain in debate, and trying to extoll all his "accomplishments" to someone who really does have substantive accomplishments for which he is respected throughout Washington.
This nonsense about Obama's accomplishments may have some traction when contrasting himself with Sen. Clinton, and her amazing claim to have been "producing change for 35 years." But if things keep on the way they are, Clinton won't be the issue any more. McCain and his REAL record of accomplishments will be.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Edited to add the quotation of post responded to:
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Do you call this reasonable argument?
Try again--see if you can imagine Obama facing McCain in debate, and trying to extoll all his "accomplishments" to someone who really does have substantive accomplishments for which he is respected throughout Washington.
[Edited (after response below) by original poster to add the following, which now reflects the info on the linked post referenced above (great! )]
This nonsense about Obama's accomplishments may have some traction when contrasting himself with Sen. Clinton, and her amazing claim to have been "producing change for 35 years." But if things keep on the way they are, Clinton won't be the issue any more. McCain and his REAL record of accomplishments will be.
I don't care enough to argue with you, or to imagine for you hypothetical scenarios set up the way you want to them to be set up.
I am just expressing the sensation of being aghast. Also being a little bemused, a lot amused.
---
Edited to add: Although expressing this, and this way, is more than a little rude. I am sorry for that rudeness. It is a lack of self-control, and that is a personal failing.
posted
It'd be great if you would note where you are changing the things you have already posted, Ron.
I'm replying to the things you said when you made the posts originally, but they seem to be evolving right before my eyes, and it's a lot of work to try to go back and revise the answers to fit the old comments. That's something I can do, but I'd rather not, if you don't mind.
Of course, you have to do what you have to do. I understand that.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course he will, and where that fails him, he'll bring up his ideas. And he'll bring up McCain's partisan rhetoric as of late. McCain is going to present a very narrow, Republican view of the world, and Obama is going to present a more complex, comprehensive plan to deal with foreign affairs, and since McCain's plan pretty much just consists of "beat the terrorists," I don't see what he'll answer with. And since that's 80% of his campaign, I don't really know what else he'll say during the debate in general.
I admit I haven't read McCain's platform on other issues, but he never talks about them. It's all about tax cuts and continuing the war (yeah, because THAT makes sense). And then somehow fiscal discipline is involved. But other than that I haven't heart anything. I don't expect much else when he's pandering to his base, but when he recognizes there are other voters out there, we'll see what he has to say.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Claudia, sorry for catching you off guard with my continued editing of my posts. But that is just the way I write. When I see how it looks in published format--something else frequently occurs to me that I want to add, or I notice a misspelling, or UBB code where I left off a close bracket or something, and while I am fixing that, I think of something else to add, or clarify. I suppose I should use the "Preview Post" function more. But usually I think I am done, before I think of something more to add.
Tresopax, that I would like to see. I wonder how deeply Obama would blush. Nobody could be that shameless.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyrhawn, you said: "McCain is going to present a very narrow, Republican view of the world, and Obama is going to present a more complex, comprehensive plan to deal with foreign affairs...."
That is hysterically funny. We will sure see about that!
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyr, I think you are greatly underestimating John McCain there. Right now, he seems to be largely relying on simplistic partisan rhetoric, but that doesn't mean that that is all he has in his bag. Whatever else you may say about him, John McCain does have a complex grasp of the issues and the ability to communicate this understanding.
edit:
Ron, It is customary here to note significant edits to your original post, such as how I did here. There isn't really a big deal with editing your posts although you can't then expect people to read your additions, but you should definitely mark when you change or add to what you've written.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Claudia, sorry for catching you off guard with my continued editing of my posts. But that is just the way I write. When I see how it looks in published format--something else frequently occurs to me that I want to add, or I notice a misspelling, or UBB code where I left off a close bracket or something, and while I am fixing that, I think of something else to add, or clarify. I suppose I should use the "Preview Post" function more. But usually I think I am done, before I think of something more to add.
Yeah, I know. And for me, sometimes the "preview" part doesn't even work very well -- it still reads differently when I see it alongside other posts, and often that sparks a correction or addition.
However, I find it's useful and courteous also to use the option of noting where I edited, especially for substantial edits. Not just a misspelling, usually, but anything of substantial content that changes the post in a way that would affect how people respond to it. It's pretty easy to stick in an "Edited to add:" or use brackets around the changed parts.
But, you know, different styles, and I can understand that you just may not like the way that works. I can certainly make a habit of quoting what the text is that I am responding to when we are conversing, and then I can go back and re-edit that alongside you. That'll work, too, so long as you don't find it offensive.
(I do perceive a need to keep the conversation straight as things change, though, as otherwise my part of the conversation may not make sense later. But this way -- you editing, and me making sure to quote every time and then go back and change as needed -- is a viable way of doing it, and I'm happy to leave it at that.)
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
You think Obama is clinically insane. Why on Earth would I take anything you say having to do with McCain/Obama seriously? If you want to try and cogently tell me what your view of Obama and McCain's foreign policy plans are, and why you think they are right and wrong, we can discuss it. Otherwise you're just yelling, and I get enough of that at work.
Squick -
That's how I felt about McCain BEFORE this election cycle. I still think he has those weapons in his arsenal, but I question whether or not the Republican party will let him use them. He still might say he's a straight talker and what not, but he's not the McCain he was eight years ago. And he has a lot more obligations to a lot more people now that he's the nominee, and venturing outside those obligations will come with penalties.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since when has Sen. McCain ever been under the thumb of the Republican Party? They are so ambivalent about him because he is such a maverick. Remember, months ago he was criticising Don Rumsfeld, calling for his dismissal, saying more troops were needed, much to the consternation of the Republican Party, who viewed that as disloyalty to the president. This is when McCain's campaign seemed all but done for. When the president did get rid of Rumsfeld, and authorized the "Surge," McCain was one of the first to endorse it. And the success that has resulted has propelled McCain into a virtual lock on the Rupublican nomination for president. To many people, this has proven the superiority of his judgment on foreign affairs.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
)]
