What does Obama stand for?

[MassJester]

Who held me back?

Dunno. It's insidious, isn't it?

 

[Feralpeg]

I normally try to stay out of these type of discussions, but I also think that the candidates need to be a little clearer on what they intend to do if elected.

Some of you say that we should go read Obama's book. Why should I have to do that? Why isn't he clearly telling people his intentions? If he is elected, what is going to do during the state of the union address? Is he going to tell the public to go read a book or is he going to clearly state what he intends to do for the country?

I really think that candidates should spend less time spouting vague rhetoric and get a bit more specific on their intentions if elected. It would be really nice if they would give the public credit for having enough sense to be able to understand the information, if given.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

I know it's a catch phrase but who says wealth has to "trickle down"? Shouldn't wealth be earned? If I don't become a millionaire, is it because wealth didn't trickle down to me?

We are talking about promoting a strong fiscal policy, right? I mean, in trickle down economics, the idea is, you give the money to the wealthy, they provide opportunity to the other 98% by way of jobs, and the entire population benefits. However, I think that your question alone is living proof of why IRL, it doesn't work...

 

[MassJester]

I normally try to stay out of these type of discussions, but I also think that the candidates need to be a little clearer on what they intend to do if elected.

Some of you say that we should go read Obama's book. Why should I have to do that? Why isn't he clearly telling people his intentions? If he is elected, what is going to do during the state of the union address? Is he going to tell the public to go read a book or is he going to clearly state what he intends to do for the country?

I really think that candidates should spend less time spouting vague rhetoric and get a bit more specific on their intentions if elected. It would be really nice if they would give the public credit for having enough sense to be able to understand the information, if given.

I agree. I just don't think it's a problem unique to one candidate.

John McCain just promissed to simplify the tax code (he's live now) -- doesn't say how, doesn't say what that will mean, and doesn't acknowledge that this has been an unfulfilled promise for the longest time.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

I normally try to stay out of these type of discussions, but I also think that the candidates need to be a little clearer on what they intend to do if elected.

Some of you say that we should go read Obama's book. Why should I have to do that? Why isn't he clearly telling people his intentions? If he is elected, what is going to do during the state of the union address? Is he going to tell the public to go read a book or is he going to clearly state what he intends to do for the country?

I really think that candidates should spend less time spouting vague rhetoric and get a bit more specific on their intentions if elected. It would be really nice if they would give the public credit for having enough sense to be able to understand the information, if given.

Because in this day and age, the American public thinks that policy wonks, who get up at the podium and talk about actually policy initiatives, are boring. Why is it that Obama, who spends more time talking about hope and change and goes very light on actual policy talk, gets all the praise and Hill and McCain get no love? Because it sells, plain and simple. We're living in the age of the 5 second sound bite. If you want to get elected, you've got to market yourself in a way that actually works. For those of us who really care about policy? Well...you've got to take a look at things other than flowery stump speeches.

 

[crazyforgoofy]

I normally try to stay out of these type of discussions, but I also think that the candidates need to be a little clearer on what they intend to do if elected.

Some of you say that we should go read Obama's book. Why should I have to do that? Why isn't he clearly telling people his intentions? If he is elected, what is going to do during the state of the union address? Is he going to tell the public to go read a book or is he going to clearly state what he intends to do for the country?

I really think that candidates should spend less time spouting vague rhetoric and get a bit more specific on their intentions if elected. It would be really nice if they would give the public credit for having enough sense to be able to understand the information, if given.

I agree up to a point. My question is Why just ask this about Senator Obama? All the candidates speak in 'campaign speak' but Obama gets the 'where does he stand?' 'what are his intentions?'

 

[tinkerbee]

I normally try to stay out of these type of discussions, but I also think that the candidates need to be a little clearer on what they intend to do if elected.

Some of you say that we should go read Obama's book. Why should I have to do that? Why isn't he clearly telling people his intentions? If he is elected, what is going to do during the state of the union address? Is he going to tell the public to go read a book or is he going to clearly state what he intends to do for the country?

I really think that candidates should spend less time spouting vague rhetoric and get a bit more specific on their intentions if elected. It would be really nice if they would give the public credit for having enough sense to be able to understand the information, if given.

I meant no harm for putting Obamas name out there I am honestly curious on where he stands and what people think of him. Jeez I guess I'll start one on Clinton and McCain too, so no one feels left out.

 

[Charade]

We are talking about promoting a strong fiscal policy, right? I mean, in trickle down economics, the idea is, you give the money to the wealthy, they provide opportunity to the other 98% by way of jobs, and the entire population benefits. However, I think that your question alone is living proof of why IRL, it doesn't work...

Really? Has there been a sudden decrease in the number of rich people?

My point isn't that we shouldn't rely on others to trickle down their wealth to us. Go make your own.

 

[kribit]

I agree up to a point. My question is Why just ask this about Senator Obama? All the candidates speak in 'campaign speak' but Obama gets the 'where does he stand?' 'what are his intentions?'

I'm not going to speak for Feralpeg, but I think people ask the question about Obama because for a lot of people he just "magically appeared." Clinton, Edward, McCain, Romney, even Thompson have history and are pretty well known to the "general population." I would be willing to place a bet that a lot of "now Obama supporters" had no idea who he was 2 years ago.

 

[Charade]

Because in this day and age, the American public thinks that policy wonks, who get up at the podium and talk about actually policy initiatives, are boring. Why is it that Obama, who spends more time talking about hope and change and goes very light on actual policy talk, gets all the praise and Hill and McCain get no love? Because it sells, plain and simple. We're living in the age of the 5 second sound bite. If you want to get elected, you've got to market yourself in a way that actually works. For those of us who really care about policy? Well...you've got to take a look at things other than flowery stump speeches.

I think this is why some people don't get the allure of Obama.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

Really? Has there been a sudden decrease in the number of rich people?

My point isn't that we shouldn't rely on others to trickle down their wealth to us. Go make your own.

I understand what you're trying to say, it just doesn't make sense.

 

[lilyv]

I'm not going to speak for Feralpeg, but I think people ask the question about Obama because for a lot of people he just "magically appeared." Clinton, Edward, McCain, Romney, even Thompson have history and are pretty well known to the "general population." I would be willing to place a bet that a lot of "now Obama supporters" had no idea who he was 2 years ago.

Some ask questions sincerely.

Some ask the same questions repeatedly because they can't be bothered to do a little reading combined with critical thinking.

Many folks were first introduced to Obama when he gave the Keynote speech at the DNC convention in 2004. They have continued to follow him since.

 

[Charade]

I understand what you're trying to say, it just doesn't make sense.

What doesn't make sense? Are there more weathly people today than say 50 years ago? And what doesn't make sense about making your own wealth?

 

[lilyv]

I think this is why some people don't get the allure of Obama.

If he's not your cup of tea, there's always Hillary or Huckabee.

"Allure?" That is so not what Obama is about.

 

[LoraJ]

I'm not going to speak for Feralpeg, but I think people ask the question about Obama because for a lot of people he just "magically appeared." Clinton, Edward, McCain, Romney, even Thompson have history and are pretty well known to the "general population." I would be willing to place a bet that a lot of "now Obama supporters" had no idea who he was 2 years ago.

I discovered him in 2004 during the democratic convention. I remember clearly how many dems and republicans alike on the DIS were very moved by his speech.

But what I am wondering is, why is it that you are so afraid of him, as you have stated elsewhere? Quite honestly, the three front-running candidates are better than what we have in the White House now.

 

[MassJester]

If he's not your cup of tea, there's always Hillary or Huckabee.

"Allure?" That is so not what Obama is about.

He is a bit sexy.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

I think this is why some people don't get the allure of Obama.

Sure, people who are policy wonks and need to hear every last detail of every policy initiative that each candidate has at every stump speech. However, the reality of the situation is, people like you, me and Feralpeg are extremely few and far between.

 

[meandtheguys2]

I agree up to a point. My question is Why just ask this about Senator Obama? All the candidates speak in 'campaign speak' but Obama gets the 'where does he stand?' 'what are his intentions?'

Because of the "change" thing. One assumes the status quo with most candidates. Very little changes on the political front due to a president.

 

[gardenhoe]

I was just wondering what qualifications he has to run our country. All I ever hear him talk about is "change". Well thats is great and all but what "change" is he talking about? If his whole platform is "change" I just don't see how that is enough for him to get my vote. Does he just mean to get republicans out of the White House? What hard core things is he going to do to bring "change" to this great country of ours? Thanks for your replys

Ever since he became Senator, he's been running for President. Has he actually done anything as Senator?

 

[DawnCt1]

The senator and presidential candidate who feels we are spending too much money overseas, has proposed this little gem. It would direct $845 BILLION of foreign aid subservient to the dictates of the United Nations. Finally, the UN will get what it wants; an opportunity to control at least some of the hard earned money of United States Taxpayer.
http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_272618845.shtml
Barack Obama's Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote
By Cliff Kincaid
Feb 12, 2008

A nice-sounding bill called the "Global Poverty Act," sponsored by Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Barack Obama, is up for a Senate vote on Thursday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. The bill, which has the support of many liberal religious groups, makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.

Barack Obama's Global Tax Proposal Up for Senate Vote

Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has not endorsed either Senator Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. But on Thursday, February 14, he is trying to rush Obama’s “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.