Posted on 07/27/2004 7:51:30 PM PDT by jmstein7
It isn't your acknowledgement that it was a good speech that aroused suspicion.
In one statement you state you are in agreement with him on several statements he made, though you failed to offer specifics. Then you state he is a leftist and are in disagreement.
You stated if it was Kerry vs. Obama you would vote for Obama. That Obama would win if he were the candidate against Bush. Very little is known about Obama so I find the praise extravagant as well as dangerous.
You qualified you were to the right of Reagan, usually done to establish conservative credentials.
Then stated race wasn't an issue for you, which struck me as odd since race isn't an issue for most people on this forum.
As I said, if I'm wrong I apologize. Your response struck me as odd, still does.
Report from my husband and daughter watching CSPAN after the convention had ended and delegates in the hall were speaking to the CSPAN microphones from the floor of the center.
They told me two different delegates talked about Obama but called him *Osama* accidentally, then corrected themselves.
They came in the office to tell me (I had OD'd on the coverage already) so I could report on FR when a THIRD person did the same thing.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm, I think I see a teeny problem with the dems' new potential star.
I see we completely disagree on this. After 36 years of following American politics as a conservative Republican and political junkie, my take is different then yours. You never, ever allow the loyal opposition to run a candidate for a seat in the US Senate unopposed. Never! Statewide election, maybe. In local community elections it happens all the time. The GOP needs to find the best candidate and run with him or her.
I agree with many here that Obama looks like a threat, but what will bring him down is "native" African-Americans who will be sour about Obama reaping the benefit of all the affirmative action they think is supposed to be payback for their ancestors' suffering from slavery.
Sure would like to hear Obama talk about reparations, wouldn't you???!!!
The media was saying exactly the same thing about Mario Cuomo after his exceptional keynote speech during the Dims '84 convention. He seemingly came out of nowhere & said exactly what the dims wanted to hear 'cause they were desperate, just like now.
He got alot of mileage out of that one speech, but in the end one speech got him nowhere. Just like this guy.
People just do not like liberals.
I've seen him interviewed and I was quite impressed.
Was not nearly as impressed with his speech - same tired old playbook and allegations.
The problem with this theory is that the timing is wrong. Obama, who had been catching up to Hull for weeks, made massive gains after the Dem debate on February 23, besting Hull by about 19 points. Hull's divorce records were unsealed in early March.
Obama, it should be noted, was also not the machine candidate. That was Hynes. And who won in Hynes own ward? Obama, 2 to 1.
It's not dirty tricks that's propelling this guy, it's politics.
And one more thing about Jack Ryan. The problem wasn't that his files were released. It's that everyone knew what was in them, everyone knew they were going to be released, and yet he kept on insisting to the public and the party that there was nothing embarrassing in them. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I have very little sympathy for the guy.
See my post #62
I can see an Edwards-Obama ticket coming up in 2008. Maybe we'll need to run Rice on one half of the ticket ourselves.
I thought he didn't live up to the hype.
I don't think the GOP can beat him and he will enter the Senate not knowing how strong he is and more importantly he will remain politically untested until 2010.
Based on the initial information you have provided I would say he does bear similarity to Clinton.
That is why conservatives need to react rationally. We were given a gift. Obama could have blindsided us a few years down the road. Instead the Dems tipped their hand now. It is time to analyze how Clinton rose to power. To study the ineffectiveness of the attacks against him, and formulate a strategy to neutralize Obama.
Hysteria is a hindrance to that mission. It would only lead to furthering his political rise. I'm not worried at the moment for precise reason we have time to counter the threat.
Not on your life. With no GOP senate candidate (even a sure loser) and no chance of a Bush win, you can kiss some GOP house seats goodbye. Definitely Crane, and maybe even big names like Hyde and Hastert.
This is about more than this race. We need to do what's best for the whole ticket.
Oh for pete's sake. It was not.
I agree with the many here who were impressed by him. His speech was VERY strong. Even conservative commentators on Fox were wowed. Whether we agree on the issues or not is largely irrelevant. Much of politics is in the presentation and his presentation is impressive. He shouldn't be underestimated.
I didn't think we disagreed on that point.
Again, find the best candidate and run with that person, win or lose. Don't let this guy run unopposed.
Nobody here has "race issues" either, and your insinuation that others would is well off the mark.
Why don't you name some of the "points" he made that you agreed with.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.