Blogcritics Comments on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Comment by taihunter on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:14:45 EDT

Looks to me like some of the most experienced are also some of the biggest criminals!

Comment by Conrad Dalton on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:19:29 EDT

Obama has been around long enough to show he has both better judgment and greater intelligence than McCain. It should be obvious. Who was in favor of invading Iraq? Who was NOT in favor of invading Iraq? That by itself, is sufficient to separate the real boy from the real man, Keep in mind that the Iraq war which McCain fully supported has irreparably damaged the US in more ways than one. The Iraq debacle has exacerbated the economic problems building up for the past several years and which are now out of control. And McCain wants to bomb Iran, a country that has not started a war in modern history. That bit of lunacy would most likely push the price of oil so high that the US economy would completely collapse. It is ironic that McCain and his warmongering buddies have been losing the war against bin Laden who sits in a cave watching the US economy self-destruct. And the warmongering McCainites want to make bin Laden happier by continuing to create unrest in the Middle East, the primary source of the energy that keeps the US economy from collapsing. The US badly needs a change in direction and McCain is hardly the one to do it.

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:48:01 EDT

And proudly so.

Comment by Zedd on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:28:54 EDT

Boys are gross. Sigh.

Comment by Andy Marsh on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:01:05 EDT

George Bush got re-elected in 2004 because John Kerry is a douchebag, no other reason than that...it's called the lesser of two evils. Most people voted to keep bush in office because we didn't and DON'T want a tax and spend liberal running the country, unfortunately, the republcans found one of the only living tax and spend republicans on the planet! it's funny, but you'd think that the presidents' approval rating would hurt McCain, but the fact that the democrat controlled congress has an, as bad, if not worse, approval rating as the pres makes that a moot point! And how the hell you figure Obama has shown any judgement or intelligence is beyond me and a lot of other folks! He hasn't been around long enough to show anything!

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Wed, 16 Jul 2008 01:56:39 EDT

I couldn't figure out whether it was the caca itself that freaked you out, Zedd, or the mental picture of John McCain drowning in it. Your old-fashioned squeamishness on the topic is oddly charming. You remind me of my younger nephew, who when he was little was scared ~~shitless~~ stiff of his own poop. It made fatherhood quite an interesting experience for my brother, I can tell you, especially when travelling by train... You'll have to forgive me since I find the whole subject of output from that area, whether it be solid, gaseous or liquid, utterly hilarious, and will continue to laugh about it until I get colon cancer, and serve me right. :-)

Comment by Zedd on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:39:54 EDT

I love Russian literature! What you talk'n bout Biff? ---- Ah I've spotted a fellow goober! Way to go Independent. ---- Doc, I'm hurt. It took a lot for me to post about "you know what". You ignored me. You've just lost an eigth of a cool point, hmph!

Comment by Independent on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:13:57 EDT

"How about...because millions of Americans apparently don't agree with you and voted for him?" It's simply one more example of millions of Americans being senile along with McCain. But we already knew that. Proof: George Bush got re-elected in 2004.

Comment by Clavos on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:04:08 EDT

"Which raises the question, how in the world did McCain get to be the Republican candidate?" Umm, lessee...oh, I dunno...hmmm. Wait, wait, don't tell me! How about...because millions of Americans apparently don't agree with you and voted for him?

Comment by Independent on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:10:52 EDT

Obama beats McCain. Obame wins on judgmemt and intelligence. I would rather have Obama making critical decisions of importance to the country. McCain's military experience is commendable but it is insignificant in selecting a president, and it may actually be a detriment. His long-suffering in Vietnam may may have left him grieving to vicariously win a war with Iran because of the Vietnam war in which he participated in and we lost 35 years ago. McCain is too old. His inadequate and hesitant answers to questions is obvious. The last thing the country needs is a senile president. Which raises the question, how in the world did McCain get to be the Republican candidate?

Comment by Baronius on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:13:47 EDT

What's that, Dread? My pudding was right over there. I met Jack Paar once.

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:54:54 EDT

Gogol? Did I hear someone mention Gogol? Yes, Bliff, but no-one knows why. I imagine that Baronius was referring to the mini-debate about 40 comments ago as to the linguistic pedigree of the word caca. It's rather strange. A bit like when old Wilbur (who sleeps a lot more than he used to) abruptly chimes in with an answer to a trivial question you asked him an hour ago and had forgotten about. ;-)

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:45:52 EDT

Moreover, the networks overlook Obama's "misstatements." Then where did you hear about them?

Comment by bliffle on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:40:43 EDT

Gogol? Did I hear someone mention Gogol? Is someone nosing around among the dead souls of Russian Literature?

Comment by Don Sanchez on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:52:58 EDT

The network media who, in concert, came up with the term "gravitas" in the last election have lost it from their lexicon. Moreover, the networks overlook Obama's "misstatements." They may not want people to get the idea.

Comment by Baronius on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:39:05 EDT

If memory serves, the lead character in Gogol's The Overcoat was named Akakei Akakeivich.

Comment by Baronius on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:35:23 EDT

Words have gender - animals have sex. Hillary Clinton does not have a gender.

Comment by Zedd on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:05:19 EDT

Can we use the word "gender" instead of "sex". It's sort of icky and awkward.

Comment by Zedd on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 21:56:15 EDT

Doc, While I post this with ears plugged, finger pinching nose and singing to drown out the gross nature of it all, the word kaka is also Zulu and a bunch of other languages. Probably comes from the sound babies make when trying to do "it". Gosh I feel light headed. YUCK how could I. Boys are so gross. Think nice thoughts.... Sense and Sensibility, flowers, pink, Jane Austin, ruffles, la la la la laaaa. WWMMS. What would my mother say...!!!!

Comment by Zedd on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 21:42:43 EDT

Moral of the story, there is a lot of military service among Democrats and a lot of reserve ACTION among Republicans. Thanks for that stats kiddo. RJ, You are a kid just like I thought. Awe look at that baby face. OMG. LOL. IDK think we can be bffs LOL? What youngster would be Republican in this era? L . . ser maybe?? I'm just say'n. Instead of "Yes We Can" it's a corny litany of irrelevant stats about fake military service while an imbecile sits in the White House. L . . serville

Comment by Jordan Richardson on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:16:32 EDT

Thank you for clarifying. It seems we are entirely on the same page.

Comment by Dan Miller on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:08:01 EDT

Jordan, First, permit me to apologize for any lack of clarity. What I meant to say too often goes without saying that it is just as bad to vote for a candidate because of his/her race or sex as it is to vote against a candidate for that reason. In a recent article, I touched on this. I consider it to have been pernicious to to have voted, during the Democratic Party primaries, for or against Senator Obama because of his race, or for or against Senator Clinton because of her sex. Yet many people did just that. During the Democratic Party primaries, the Black vote seems to have been overwhelmingly in favor of Senator Obama, while the female voters tended (less strongly) to have supported Senator Clinton. Some White women who supported Senator Obama were castigated by other women as traitors to their sex. I hope that we agree that these are not helpful attitudes. Dan

Comment by Jordan Richardson on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:20:49 EDT

At risk of sounding completely ridiculous, I flat-out don't know what you're getting at. Instead of floundering around aimlessly like I'm prone to do, I'll try and cut to the chase: You say that without question, it goes without saying that "racism" is racism regardless of by or against whom it is practiced. That, I submit is the problem. It does go without saying, far too often. What, specifically, is "the problem?" That it goes without saying? Racism, period, goes without saying? Or racism only seems to be an issue when it is against blacks and that other forms of racism "go without saying" and thus go unreported or under-reported? I'm having trouble simplifying what you're saying. I apologize. I would only call your attention to the recent Democratic Party primaries. And this will tell me that black people are more prone to vote Republican in federal elections? Once again, I have to plead ignorance. I'm not really sure what I'm going to be looking for here that refutes my point. Black people voted more for Obama in the primaries than they did for Clinton? Women voted more for Clinton than they did for Obama and, after Clinton lost, threatened to vote for McCain for spite? I think we largely agree on the majority of this issue. Black people voting for candidates merely because the candidate is black isn't good, to put it rather simply. But I still posit that black people are more prone to identify with the VALUES of the Democratic Party than they are with those of the GOP. I'm not sure how looking at the Democratic Primaries are going to refute this, nor am I quite sure what, specifically, I'm looking for. Sorry for not understanding, Dan.

Comment by Dan Miller on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:59:53 EDT

Jordan, You say that without question, it goes without saying that "racism" is racism regardless of by or against whom it is practiced. That, I submit is the problem. It does go without saying, far too often. Second, you say

As far as blacks voting for Obama and that argument, I think it has more to do with the party and less to do with the man and his skin colour.

I would only call your attention to the recent Democratic Party primaries. Dan

Comment by Jordan Richardson on Barack Obama - The Least Experienced Major-Party Presidential Candidate in 64 Years

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:41:55 EDT

With all due respect, it strikes me that "racism" is racism regardless of by or against whom it is practiced. Without question, this goes without saying. I merely meant to frame my remarks in the current context of this discussion and focus almost entirely on the black/white issue, as that is the current issue of discussion. There are several examples of hate crimes against other groups and races, including a fairly significant increase in the incidents involving Jews and a modest jump in anti-white hate crime incidents. Is it no less racist to vote for someone because of his race than against him for the same reason? I'm tempted to quote Jerry Seinfeld here ("If I like their race, how am I racist?"), but I do see your point. If somebody wins an achievement because of their blackness, their whiteness, their woman-ness, and so on, there is a lack of inherent fairness. It is the exact same thing as people voting for a candidate because he/she is the Christian candidate. Unfortunately, voting is done largely on image. Voters are more likely to vote for a candidate with whom they feel a sort of kinship or even personal closeness, which often equates to racial, religious, or other issues that are about as far from policy issues as you can get. That's just a democratic reality. The racism discussion does depend largely on how we define it. The US Civil Rights Commission defines racism as: ...any action or attitude, conscious or unconscious, that subordinates an individual or group based on skin colour or race. It can be enacted individually or institutionally. While the United Nations Convention defined it as: the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life. (Bold emphasis mine, of course). I think the latter is a pretty good guidepost to start defining racism in our world. As far as blacks voting for Obama and that argument, I think it has more to do with the party and less to do with the man and his skin colour, although there's no real general way to draw this out objectively other than to say that black people tend to not vote Republican.