Obama's Learning Curve

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]
100meters wrote:

I’m pretty sure Obama’s still willing to talk to the enemy. And the vast majority of us think that’s a good thing.

Didn’t McCain loose this argument last week?

BostonBarrister wrote:

Having some behind-the-scenes communications with enemy nations is a good idea; giving credibility and propaganda material to dictators by engaging in presidential-level meetings - particularly without gaining concessions - is not a good idea.

And no, he didn’t.

100meters wrote:

I’m pretty sure he did. At least in the media narrative/public perception arena.[/quote]

McCain is right. In addition to what I said immediately above, talking also needs to be more than flapping gums. Dialogue is fine, but useless without leverage. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/05/21/2008-05-21_obama_needs_a_quick_refresher_course_in_.html?print=1&page=all

22

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
He changed the substance of his position, and he’s trying to play it off as if his original position wasn’t a mistake while he changes what he meant. Yeah, Obama is nothing like all those old politicians…[/quote]

I really don’t understand how you can say that. I asked you to show me the alleged contradiction in his words, and all you did was link to some more article that goes out of its way to juxtapose Obama’s words with those of people working for him. It’s what I call a stretch.

So please, stop this charade. Criticize the man’s lack of experience, his haircut, his scrawny body, his speech or even his race. But quit this attacks on his tailor and half-assed attempts to make him say what he never uttered.

23

[quote]lixy wrote:

I really don’t understand …[/quote]

Apparently.

24

How would Obama deal with this?

"Many economists have previously predicted that a decision on behalf of the Gulf states to abandon the dollar peg would have disastrous consequences for the greenback and the American economy.

Moves by the likes of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to diversify their foreign exchange holdings out of dollars would amount to a vote of “no confidence” in the dollar and may cause other countries with large dollar reserves, such as China and Japan, to follow suit and begin dumping the greenback en masse.

China has threatened repeatedly to use the “nuclear option” and liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries in response to continued pressure on the Communist state to force a yuan revaluation. According to a widely-read London Telegraph report, such an event “could trigger a dollar crash” and also “cause a spike in US bond yields, hammering the US housing market and perhaps tipping the economy into recession.”

All his eloquence won’t amount to jackshit.

25

[quote]
BostonBarrister wrote:
He changed the substance of his position, and he’s trying to play it off as if his original position wasn’t a mistake while he changes what he meant. Yeah, Obama is nothing like all those old politicians…

lixy wrote:
I really don’t understand how you can say that. I asked you to show me the alleged contradiction in his words, and all you did was link to some more article that goes out of its way to juxtapose Obama’s words with those of people working for him. It’s what I call a stretch.

So please, stop this charade. Criticize the man’s lack of experience, his haircut, his scrawny body, his speech or even his race. But quit this attacks on his tailor and half-assed attempts to make him say what he never uttered.[/quote]

I’ll explain how I can say that.

The original article, and I, have been claiming Obama’s positions have been flopping around, based on his initial mistake, but no one ever said that Obama was making contradictory statements. Only you think that’s a pre-req here.

Obama’s top campaign advisers have been adding caveats and codicils to his position, which effectively change the meaning of his original statement. He’s not saying it’s changed - he’s changing it by proxy. And he needs to, because his original position was a mistake that he has been much criticized on.

Are you going to tell me that you think his top campaign advisers are going off on their own and making stuff up? And if that’s the case, why hasn’t the candidate himself contradicted them? It’s not as if they were unnoticed statements. He’s taking a lot of flak for them - and still no clarification that they’re mistaken?

No, the critique is dead on.

26

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
How would Obama deal with this?

"Many economists have previously predicted that a decision on behalf of the Gulf states to abandon the dollar peg would have disastrous consequences for the greenback and the American economy.

Moves by the likes of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to diversify their foreign exchange holdings out of dollars would amount to a vote of “no confidence” in the dollar and may cause other countries with large dollar reserves, such as China and Japan, to follow suit and begin dumping the greenback en masse.

China has threatened repeatedly to use the “nuclear option” and liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries in response to continued pressure on the Communist state to force a yuan revaluation. According to a widely-read London Telegraph report, such an event “could trigger a dollar crash” and also “cause a spike in US bond yields, hammering the US housing market and perhaps tipping the economy into recession.”

All his eloquence won’t amount to jackshit.

[/quote]

He would hope really hard that they would change their mind.

Details are a little harder to come by.

If China uses the much touted “Nuke Option” they would only hurt themselves much more and seriously destroy the purchasing power of their best customer. To what end?

27

[quote]
BostonBarrister wrote:
He changed the substance of his position, and he’s trying to play it off as if his original position wasn’t a mistake while he changes what he meant. Yeah, Obama is nothing like all those old politicians…

lixy wrote:
I really don’t understand how you can say that. I asked you to show me the alleged contradiction in his words, and all you did was link to some more article that goes out of its way to juxtapose Obama’s words with those of people working for him. It’s what I call a stretch.

So please, stop this charade. Criticize the man’s lack of experience, his haircut, his scrawny body, his speech or even his race. But quit this attacks on his tailor and half-assed attempts to make him say what he never uttered.[/quote]

Aside from my previous point, you didn’t even read the linked articles, did you?

28

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
"Many economists have previously predicted that a decision on behalf of the Gulf states to abandon the dollar peg would have disastrous consequences for the greenback and the American economy. [/quote]

You need “economists” to tell you this?

29

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:

BostonBarrister wrote:
He changed the substance of his position, and he’s trying to play it off as if his original position wasn’t a mistake while he changes what he meant. Yeah, Obama is nothing like all those old politicians…

lixy wrote:
I really don’t understand how you can say that. I asked you to show me the alleged contradiction in his words, and all you did was link to some more article that goes out of its way to juxtapose Obama’s words with those of people working for him. It’s what I call a stretch.

So please, stop this charade. Criticize the man’s lack of experience, his haircut, his scrawny body, his speech or even his race. But quit this attacks on his tailor and half-assed attempts to make him say what he never uttered.

I’ll explain how I can say that.

The original article, and I, have been claiming Obama’s positions have been flopping around, based on his initial mistake, but no one ever said that Obama was making contradictory statements. Only you think that’s a pre-req here.

Obama’s top campaign advisers have been adding caveats and codicils to his position, which effectively change the meaning of his original statement. He’s not saying it’s changed - he’s changing it by proxy. And he needs to, because his original position was a mistake that he has been much criticized on.

Are you going to tell me that you think his top campaign advisers are going off on their own and making stuff up? And if that’s the case, why hasn’t the candidate himself contradicted them? It’s not as if they were unnoticed statements. He’s taking a lot of flak for them - and still no clarification that they’re mistaken?

No, the critique is dead on.
[/quote]

Ok. That’s clearer. I don’t think sentences as “Mr. Obama shifts and shambles” or talking about that man’s “pivots” are called for, but I get your point.

I am yet to see any contradiction from the man himself, and compared his rivals, he is the most consistent. Not that we have much to go on, but it still counts.

So I’d appreciate it if you (yeah, I hold you higher standards than the rest) stopped amalgamating his crew’s words with his. I’ll say it again: it makes you sound really desperate.

30

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/05/26/politics/fromtheroad/entry4127479.shtml

Obama talks about his the experiences his family had during WW2. CBS reports it verbatim.

Marshall Koniev would have been shocked to realize Patton and his troops were fighting with him in the First Ukranian Division of the Red Army. (Patton would have been shocked too!)

The Red Army liberated the camp in Jan. of 1945 while fighting thru Poland. The US had not crossed into Germany.

Did he make another mistake or lie this time?

31

[quote]hedo wrote:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/05/26/politics/fromtheroad/entry4127479.shtml

Obama talks about his the experiences his family had during WW2. CBS reports it verbatim.

Marshall Koniev would have been shocked to realize Patton and his troops were fighting with him in the First Ukranian Division of the Red Army. (Patton would have been shocked too!)

The Red Army liberated the camp in Jan. of 1945 while fighting thru Poland. The US had not crossed into Germany.

Did he make another mistake or lie this time?

[/quote]

He is all about change. Changing the facts to suit his audience.

32

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
He is all about change. Changing the facts to suit his audience.
[/quote]

He’s also about hope. Hope that nobody will notice.

33

[quote]hedo wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
How would Obama deal with this?

"Many economists have previously predicted that a decision on behalf of the Gulf states to abandon the dollar peg would have disastrous consequences for the greenback and the American economy.

Moves by the likes of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to diversify their foreign exchange holdings out of dollars would amount to a vote of “no confidence” in the dollar and may cause other countries with large dollar reserves, such as China and Japan, to follow suit and begin dumping the greenback en masse.

China has threatened repeatedly to use the “nuclear option” and liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries in response to continued pressure on the Communist state to force a yuan revaluation. According to a widely-read London Telegraph report, such an event “could trigger a dollar crash” and also “cause a spike in US bond yields, hammering the US housing market and perhaps tipping the economy into recession.”

All his eloquence won’t amount to jackshit.

He would hope really hard that they would change their mind.

Details are a little harder to come by.

If China uses the much touted “Nuke Option” they would only hurt themselves much more and seriously destroy the purchasing power of their best customer. To what end?
[/quote]

Remember these are Chi Comms. They would regard it as part of war, the price paid. Yeah, if they were rational, I’d agree with you, but these are Comms. They did the Great Leap Forward and watched millions starve; they’re nuts.

34

[quote]hedo wrote:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/05/26/politics/fromtheroad/entry4127479.shtml

Obama talks about his the experiences his family had during WW2. CBS reports it verbatim.

Marshall Koniev would have been shocked to realize Patton and his troops were fighting with him in the First Ukranian Division of the Red Army. (Patton would have been shocked too!)

The Red Army liberated the camp in Jan. of 1945 while fighting thru Poland. The US had not crossed into Germany.

Did he make another mistake or lie this time?

[/quote]

“Obama also spoke about his uncle, who was part of the American brigade that helped to liberate Auschwitz.”

There were lots of death camps/internment camps. My old man helped liberate one and has pics somewhere. It WAS bad. Maybe Obama meant Dachau. There were a lot of camps. But yeah, if he’s going to talk about it, he should know that Auschwitz is in Poland, which the Russians liberated.

35

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:

lixy wrote:

Criticize his lack of experience if you want, but don’t tell us he changed positions when he didn’t. It makes you seem really desperate. But that, we already got from the dozen threads started by Republicans about Obama around here…

He changed the substance of his position, and he’s trying to play it off as if his original position wasn’t a mistake while he changes what he meant. Yeah, Obama is nothing like all those old politicians…[/quote]

I remeber when Obama said we will be in Iraq for 100 years:)

36

BB, here’s something interesting,

McCain Voted With Bush 100 Percent Of The Time In 2008

37

Looks as if Obama is courting the Jewish vote, but he’s been studying at the Clinton school of biography massage:

38

[quote]lixy wrote:
BB, here’s something interesting,

McCain Voted With Bush 100 Percent Of The Time In 2008

Interesting, but it would seem there’s a lot of guesswork going on here, given the President doesn’t vote on legislation. Here’s the description from your link:

[i]CQ’s Presidential Support studies try to determine how often a legislator votes in line with the President’s position:

CQ tries to determine what the president personally, as distinct from other administration officials, does and does not want in the way of legislative action. This is done by analyzing his messages to Congress, news conference remarks and other public statements and documents.

So, these studies only track votes when the President has an explicit, stated opinion on a bill. According to CQ, Senator John McCain has voted with President Bush 100% of the time in 2008 and 95% of the time in 2007:[/i]

Particularly, I wonder how they match up statements and legislation temporily; i.e., assuming they have evinced a Presidential preference on a piece of legislation, do they control for how that opinion changes with changes to the proposed legislation?

I’m guessing they had an objective in mind here, and that was tying McCain - and Congressional Republicans no doubt - to Bush in the guise of a study…

39

Obama is just as much a lightweight as Bush. 57 states? Liberating Auschwitz? And the dude is Harvard educated?

Well, Bush is Ivy League too.

Are they all that fucking stupid?

40

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Looks as if Obama is courting the Jewish vote, but he’s been studying at the Clinton school of biography massage:

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/27/obama-my-grandfather-liberated-auschwitz/[/quote]

Yes, they’ll be greatly offended that it just turned out to be some other concentration camp.

You seem so desperate about this campaign.

You’ll excuse every McCain gaffe, sunni/shia, al qaeda/iran, not knowing who controls Iran, Phil Gramm as economic advisor, Iraq will be easy, etc…

but get all worked up over the name of a concentration camp. Odd.