Laugh at me now…i’ll just have to pray for you.

But it is thrilling to hear you admit the truth of that lack of experience charge, seems that this is the first time “OH” has been tested. Which means he is making up as he goes along. Never said he wasn’t intellectually capable, as the lessons of being under pressure are certainly being learned. But how is the learning applied. Are we to watch his growth unfold or don’t you think it matters in a resume’ of qualifications for President of the United States? I don’t think we can or ought to settle for surprises.

As for Lady “OH”, I actually spent time going through her speeches, many of them echoing the same admiration for “OH” as you but always tugging on the racial always tugging on the balance sheet from that second set of books, pointing out what is owed. If she would be the first lady to all Americans, then as such I would expect her and “OH” to use the real figures and emphasize what has been earned. Her words divide and pour oil on the fires as fuel, where that oil should be used as a soothing balm. I don’t care that the speeches were made for Democrats, I don’t care that the thoughts were voiced before presumption of the MAD throne. The appeal was undignified and unapologetically racist in tone, the action called for was hateful and the dialog sparked was angry and thirsting for blood. Worse is the fact that her words contradict the message you claim her husband is trying to send, and support the message of his former pastor. It was not an appeal to get over the hate speech, it is hate speech. How is your man supposed to get past the beliefs of his own wife, without use of a muzzle, without resort to lying to cover up her out bursts.

As an influential figure in American Political discourse which “OH” is, it remains to be seen if OH will be able to change the thinking of the Modern American Democrat (MAD) Party , and its policies (imho) of Self Assured Destruction. The hint is there, in his talks to the NEA. But in his dance around issues of life, no clear signal have I yet discerned on where “OH” stands. The convention in Denver will if nothing else be enlightening on that. Will the delegates get a chance to vote on the platform first or will the crowning precede any real declaration of principals?

I still do not believe he is “yet” Presidential material for the reasons stated. He has a ways to go yet, but it is possible in the future.

An Benj, I was not asking why you were still here, but rather questioning your motivation for defending “OH”s words when works are the needed measure of the man.

Barking MAD

BTW – I hear you re your wondering why I’m still Clubbing. May back off a bit now – There’s magic in repetition but…You mentioned below you’d be “montioring conservative dialog” re O. I ‘d urge you trust your first gut responses to what O says as you did in March. My pop once noted that intellectuals/academics often come up with “intelligent” excuses not to be moved. Didn’t believe in being a “fan” of any pol either. Hope you and me both can find our owm middle ground this campaign season…

HERE’S that old post of yours…

Having listened to Mr. Obama’s speech, and (noting the differences of political philosophy I have with his chosen party) That while I remain steadfastly unconvinced of his readiness to be President, I am impressed with “O”‘s mettle.

Please note, the speech may have been initiated by conversations about his minister an his church, but the speech is about much much more. Mr. Obama may very well have enabled us to initiate the kinds of discussion necessary to move past the failed experimentations of racial politics and get on with being Americans.

It is a very dangerous position that “O” has started to carve out, because it is in many areas a direct challenge to the basic philosophy on with the Democrat party is currently campaigning. That is a hopeful sign, IMO. Getting past the Political Correctness and getting over the fear of Hate speech is necessary to even have the conversation. Invoking his Grandmothers statements and his ministers too, is required to shed the fetters that thought PC puts upon the nation.

I don’t know if Obama is for real, but this speech was a start. I do not yet trust his zeal, nor his zealots, but I am willing to watch as they present proof of their beliefs. I do not trust that a man whose home was paid for by “Saddam’s Bag Man” is presidential timber, but he may be someone who can help us determine the measure of government intervention in private lives, and the level of self determination required and expected of all citizens.

The speech itself is a maze of recognizing conflicting themes and conflicting passions and conflicting motivations. It is a plea to renew real debate, and recognize the flaw in us all. I will be watching the Dem response to the challenge. And monitoring Conservative dialog as well.

“Oh” hasn’t even attempted to run a business, hasn’t taken a stab at paying a wage for productive salable effort. What has he produced? What has he run, how big was the payroll? For what major state, city or even corporation has he been the executive?

NONE. He has not been tested by time, by pressure, or under fire. Heck he hasn’t even been taken to court. We do not know how good or bad he’ll be. We don’t even know if we want him. All the variables answered by experience are left unanswered. What the heck is the guy even doing in the race? All we know is that he talks very enthusiastically, he begs most effectively, and he is personable. No where in his books in his lectures or in his speeches do we get a clue as to how he will do under the microscope. No where is there a history to allow us to judge his judgment, but the lesser acts of his lifetime. Alas, “OH”s words and your projection of their possible meanings do not lend credibility to “OH” nor am i about to grant to you title as judge of my thoughts nor “OH”s qualifications.

Sitting in that church pew for twenty years does say something definite, meeting Ghadaffi and working with Farrakhan involved actions that allow us to judge the formation of his opinions and involve creeds of faiths that mock his profession of religiosity. The deeds of his associates say much about the man that “OH” is, and what ideals he keeps for company and in his bed.

Even if I agreed with his philosophy, he has not proven himself to be ready. Why is he in the race? You must be humoring us, there is no other possible logical answer to such dark folly. My conclusion is simple, you all must be barking MAD.

I wrote my reply above before his speech was uttered, yet I think that the substance of the man still belies the substance of his heart. Yeah he is a politician, but what has he done? Yeah he sounds neat, but what has he done?
I do not believe he knows what it is that makes America great, his speech confirms it.

Can you hear yourselves? Have you already forgotten about Bush Derangement Syndrome?

Look, I get it that Obama is a bigger fraud than the average politician, an empty suit with a vapor trail for a resume, and that his two dopily-titled books describe a life and person less interesting that he thinks it is. I figured out I wouldn’t vote for him on a huge bet with a gun to my head long before any of the Chicago stuff started coming out. I don’t want him to win either, especially since he and the Drag Queen party he represents are hell-bent on recreating the 70s. But. He’s. Not. Hitler. For that matter, he’s not quite Hugo Chavez, either. He is Jimmy Carter with better clothes and a tan, though, and his wife is a motor-mouthed insufferable shrew. But he’s not Hitler, and Michelle is not Eva Braun or Ilse Koch.

He’s the only one of the two major Presidential candidates who HAS to make a speech on patriotism, just as he was the only one had to make one (or was it two?) on racism. A man running for office who has to keep explaining himself on a weekly basis in hopes of getting a pass is a pretty sorry schmuck.