One Mans Blog
Specialization is for Insects.
Posted on Dec 27, 2007 - 1:02am by John P. in Politics, Videos
Let’s face it. It looks like the two most likely candidates that will be put forth by the Democratic party for the next presidential election will be Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Love em’ or hate em’, you better start getting familiar with their political views now.
So, here is a speech Senator Obama gave on August 2 regarding how he believes the US needs to fight Terrorism. I’m not going to color it with any opinion, just let you guys watch it and tell me what you think!
Part 1:
Part 2:
 |
Get OMB via e-mail:
|
I use the "No Adverts for Friends" plugin by Donncha O Caoimh
Well this is a loaded gun post, With no intent on starting a flaming dialogue, I will say this about Obama. He is extremely intelligent, charismatic, and comes off as solid and sincere. His description of the mess that ensued after 9-11 culminating with the invasion of Iraq is right on in my view. The problem with his being placed as a national candidate, if it is a problem, is that his lack of experience will lead some to conclude he is an idealist, with little practicle experience in the theater of foreign policy. His honest opinions, whether one agrees with them or not, are a refreshing change from the likes of Hilary, and some of the leading Republican candidates who constantly moderate their views to appeal to the largest possible base of voters.
His rise in polls on the eve of Iowa, and on the Republican side the sudden emergence of Huckabee make one thing certain, it is anyones game at this point.
On the Democrat side, I like Obama. For the same reasons I liked Bill Clinton.. you can see him as a charismatic leader. I don’t share some of his views on things like universal health care (where do you get the money for that? we need a smaller government, not a bigger one) and other stances, but next to Kucinich, I find him the most likable.
My choice of candidate, though, will be Ron Paul.
The main reason is because the past couple decades we’ve seen people flip and flop back and forth changing opinions on things as the wind blows (or the dollar drags).
Ron Paul’s voted the same way for more than a decade, so his experience and promises are trustworthy. If he says something and it matches with the way he’s voted so far, we can be 99% sure it’s the truth.
Secondly, he seems to be one of the only candidates that truly understands how wasteful we are right now.
We’re printing money we don’t have, we’re borrowing money from China, and we keep spending.
I listen to Paul and he sounds honest, eager, and best of all, you can tell that he gives 2 shits about what other politicians think of him.
Paul’s gone head to head with Bernanke and the Fed about our economy, he’s a doctor, and he’s been consistent and honest.
Right now our 3 biggest problems with politicians and presidents are:
1) They don’t seem to truly understand the effects of economics.
2) They don’t have a realistic view of what normal people deal with when trying to get or work with healthcare.
3) They say one thing and do another. Or worse off, often get “bought off” to approve things that are not in OUR best interest, but the interests of big companies, pharmaceutical companies, etc.
For #1, I see Ron Paul go HEAD TO HEAD with the FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAwvlDJgJbM
I was simply blown away by this. I can’t imagine any other candidate could discuss economic policy at this detail. I want someone in office that truly understands how to bring our economy back to where it needs to be, what needs to be done to fix the housing bubble, and what needs to be done to avoid or get out of our current recession (which many people are starting to say we’re already in).
For #2, Dr. Ron Paul is a DOCTOR and understands what the patients want and what the doctors and nurses need to do their job. Most of the other candidates have been politicians for a long time and don’t know what it’s like out there on the healthcare battlefield. You can talk about it or visit hospitals until you’re blue in the face, but until you’re actually delivering the baby of a mother without insurance, you won’t understand the true plight of the American middle class and poor.
I can’t think of anyone more qualified to fix healthcare than a doctor who’s been practicing for decades. There’s absolutely no argument that any other candidate has NEARLY the amount of experience with healthcare that Paul does.
I really like his thoughts on healthcare:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjuEdJ0DAGc
For #3, he’s consistent. He’s been voting the same way when something was UNPOPULAR as he does now that it’s POPULAR.
Take a look at this page:
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/issues/iraq/index.html
Look at how many candidates supported it then (it was popular and political suicide not to), but oppose it now (when it’s popular and political suicide not to).
That just physically disgusts me.
I’m tired of people who are fair weather politicians. Be unpopular. If you truly know that you’re right.. go out there and do it.. stop pandering for votes. It insults the American votes you represent and it does NOTHING.
Also, the fact that Ron Paul has THE MOST SUPPORT FROM ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY means a lot. The soldiers out there in Iraq and Afghanistan KNOW what it’s like. They know what’s happening over there MUCH better than we do.
For those that oppose Paul’s view on Iraq, do you also oppose the experience of our soldiers?
I don’t want to turn that into a pissing match, but our soldiers don’t want to pull out when things get bad. They know how effective we are or are not being. They know what the news doesn’t cover, they know what the papers don’t print. If they are this supportive of someone who nobody wants to talk about, I want to listen to that guy.
The mainstream news isn’t covering Paul as much as other candidates. FOX, CNN, and other channels take down online polls that show Paul leading by DOUBLE because they call them hacked, or say that they’re unfairly biased.
If it’s bots or hacking that’s putting Paul at the top of online polls, then who’s sending him all those checks? They’re cashing and they’re sure as heck not fake.
I never voted before because while I had an idea of “who the best of the worst” would be, I honestly didn’t care enough to truly follow through.
It’s exciting for me that at 27, someone has finally come along and made me as excited for the upcoming election as I am about the superbowl or the season finale of lost/heroes/etc.
I’ll jump off now.. I get kinda heated on these things, but like I said.. I’m not used to being excited about politics. People my age are sick and tired of being lied to and screwed over. To be excited means something is very very different. That’s a good feeling
By the way, just to clarify:
1) On the NYTimes link, Obama was also opposed from the start - kudos to him.. many democrats were not.
2) My post makes it look like Ron Paul supports staying IN Iraq - he does not. He differs from many “Republicans” on that issue and in fact wants them out yesterday before we cause more irreparable damage. I meant to infer that the soldiers aren’t wusses and if they support someone who wants to get them home, they’re speaking from experience.
Jesus Christ, the Paulites are everywhere.
I agree that it is anyone’s game. The problem I have is that it IS such a game. Obama has a serious lack of experience, as does Hillary, although she professes otherwise. On the Republican side, Giuliani has solid experience from 911, but he has his share of negatives as well. I believe the field is so wide open because there really isn’t one, fantastic, standout leader — something this country desperately needs going forward.
You know, I used to think that Barack’s main problem was his lack of experience too. But I did a little research and wrote this previous article, Barack Obama is Actually Pretty Impressive. It turns out that he’s got a lot more experience than most people think.
As far as foreign policy is concerned, I don’t think we could do any worse in that arena than we are doing now if we tried.
John
Personally, I think experience is a little over-rated.
I imagine the advisers already do a fair bit of education. Plus experience seems to equal complacency and that’s the #1 thing I want to avoid here.
Anyone who’s been a career politician cannot properly represent me =/
I’m hoping Obama makes it past the primaries. I really REALLY want Ron Paul to win because he embodies my hatred for the current system, but if it was Huckabee, Guliani, or someone else, I’d likely vote for Obama.
Although from a pragmatic point of view, if you take a look at the definition of what a Republican stands for (less government), it’s going to be pretty damned pathetic if Ron Paul doesn’t make it past the primaries. He’s the most Republican of the bunch. If anyone else wins they may as well retire the term “Republican” and institute “Neo-Conservative” in its place
Tracy, although I have strong support for one candidate (more later) and dislike many quite strongly (on both sides), I’ve been saying one thing publicly: Vote for whoever you want, just please don’t vote for Rudy.
Rudy is a joke who has done a master job turning 99 negatives and 1 win into results of 100% success. 9/11 is one of those situations: There are so very many problems the issues leading up to it (poor fire radios due to questionable no bid deals, locating the emergency center inside the biggest target of terrorist aims in all of NYC, etc.), yet because he did a good job on TV in the aftermath, he’s a hero.
I was living in NYC on 9/11 and I’ll be honest - both Rudy’s daily reports were quite helpful. But that doesn’t get him out of the hot seat for the ongoing corruption issues, civil rights issues, ousting his police chief who cleaned up the city for getting more press than him, announcing his separation during a press conference, living with him wife and mistress in the same mayor’s mansion, etc. The guy is slime, pure and simple. Don’t let his finely crafted image get you so aflutter that you don’t do your research to see what’s behind that image. After all, this is the guy who ran around aimlessly trying to escape the falling towers because he was trying to get to his command center… which he located in the basement of the WTC, a location already once blown up. Genius.
Remember, Bush’s “The whole world can hear you” speeches was inspiring. That was a true moment of leadership…. which has been all but forgotten in the years and actions since that day. One moment does not a leader make. Despite what “24″ would have us believe, and there are very very few ticking time bombs in the world. Do you want to cast your vote based on the expectation that there will be constant, daily, ongoing threat of such near-mythical ticking time bomb situation? If you truly believe that such a threat is so imminent, then Rudy *may* be a decent choice, maybe. Nobody gives a press conference like he does….
OK, now onto who I’m supporting…. it’s Obama and here’s why: he’s a new kind of leader, an actual leader, for a new kind of world. We’re in a different world today than a generation ago (or less). He’s an actual leader, not a politician who has been elevated into a leadership role. People say he has no experience, but what is “experience”? The Bush Admin, and specifically the team that launched the Iraq War were career politicians with incredible resumes and long-time “experience”. Remind me how that worked out for us?…
Since I just posted about NYC, let’s talk about the turn around of crime in NYC. William Bratton, the NYPD police chief who lead the massive reduction of crime didn’t do so from brute force or even from traditional police tactics. Instead he brought computer stats, management, inspiration, and new tactics to bear. He focused on things that traditional logic and leadership would have considered “too unimportant”, yet they had a radically larger impact on overall crime. Without question, these things turned NYC around.
While Bratton was a career policeman, he wasn’t necessarily a “career police chief” (although he is now that he’s risen to that point).
What do we need today? Leadership and inspiration. We need a leader who can actually inspire the public to demand that fuel efficiency standards increase to a minimum of 35 mpg (thus reducing, eliminating our dependence on Saudi oil all together). We need a leader who understands that pride and inspiration are far more effective at “changing hearts and minds” than bombs and ultimatums. We need a leader who can move young people to connect with the world around them for good rather than commerce. Looking at Obama’s resume and having met him and heard him speak in person, he is, in my opinion, the ONLY candidate who can deliver on this need.
When I look at the rest of the field, I see career politicians more interested in their careers than in their results. I see changes of opinion and position based on polling. I see more of the same and it makes me sick.
I’m always curious about people who say Obama lacks the “experience” to be President… do they see this same experience in other candidates? If so, how so? I fear that Obama’s opponents have painted such a great message of non-experience that it really deflects their own lacking.
No, I reallly don’t see much experience per se in most of the other candidates, with the exception of Giuliani who has his own other issues, which is why I am so concerned about the upcoming election. I am still undecided, and praying for the impossible — that a new and more viable candidate materializes….
Gingrich might have been good….sigh…
Tracy, you mean the same Gingrich who was cheating on his wife while conducting a crusade against Clinton for doing exactly that? Meh.
yes, that Gingrich, but most of the candidates have personal issues that are questionable (Clinton, Giuliani…) and more past presidents than Bill Clinton have had skeletons in their closets. I think this country has come to the point where we realize (and if we don’t, we need to) that on a personal level, our leaders are human as are we, and we need to be able to overlook their personal issues and focus on how they will lead our nation.
Tomato, buick… There’s a difference between cheating on your wife and cheating on your wife while leading a multiple million dollar, world encompassing crusade against the president of the United States for cheating on his wife as a political move.
To me, that’s more than just “personal issues”.
I think a poll is in order, how many posters actually watched both of John’s video posts on Obama before commenting?
Seems like Obama pulled a coup in Iowa this week. Hillary placing a third? Who would have thunk it? I am happy to see the established dems and republicans take a hit in Iowa. The process works.
Agreed!
I’m a Paul supporter and not really surprised at Huckabee’s results given the evangelical population in Iowa, but I think it was great to see Paul only a couple thousand votes away from 3rd place.
I’m also glad Obama won by as much as he did. I’m all for fresh blood in the office on the Dem side.
I like Obama. I don’t think he’s brilliant, but he is definitely very charismatic. I woud much rather see him in Office than Hillary.
I will probably be voting for Ron Paul though, although I don’t agree with him on everything. We NEED a smaller government, and he is by far the most likely to make this happen.
Andrew DuVal
That’s really not fair =/
Personally, if you knock a person’s support for a candidate, why not call Obama fans Obamites or something? This is the first election I’ve ever participated in because it’s the first candidate who did more than talk about how he would change things. He’s the first candidate that’s made me feel I was voting for more than just the “best of the worst”.
If anything, the fact that more young voters are coming out of the woodwork to participate in the Democracy we constantly preach about, should be a boon to anyone, be they a Paul fan or Obama fan.
Be relegating all of us who support who we feel to be the best candidate to a stereotype hurts your cause in general.
Oops, this was in response to Chris R. The reply didn’t nest it seems