<p>BedHead- that was very well put. </p>
<p>But then Bush is also not “presidential material”, yet, he is serving his second term. Don’t count McCain out yet.</p>
<p>It amuses me when politicians get criticized for being self-promoting during an election campaign. Can anyone think of a presidential campaign when the campaigners were not trying to sell themselves to the public? And how did that work out?</p>
<p>MCain should immediately name Romney as his running mate, stop talking about the war, where he and most of the country are at odds, and start talking about the economy and come up with a few ideas to help us through this mess we’re in (I’m sure Romney has a few). I feel sorry for the guy. He seems completely out of touch.</p>
<p>Well, I would like to read a book that McCain has written himself, even if it is about himself. Faith of my fathers was actually written by Mark Salter.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>We’ll have to see in November. Understanding what makes the country tick is to a large extent what makes voters tick.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>So much for the McCain Veep Announcement</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Novak</a> Says He May Have Been Used – Political Wire](<a href=“http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/07/22/novak_says_he_may_have_been_used.html]Novak”>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/07/22/novak_says_he_may_have_been_used.html)</p>
<p>Back to my first post (no. 5) – THAT’S how you steal the spotlight! Way to go, McCain campaign. Maybe there’s hope yet. :)</p>
<p>“The other aspect of this is demonstrated by speeches and press conferences he’s given. The man gives replies that are in eloquent complete sentences/paragraphs and uses words that cause people to grab for their dictionaries sometimes. He clearly articulates positions.”</p>
<p>This is utterly laughable. Yes when reading a teleprompter or delivering a well prepared speech he sure can speak. </p>
<p>Other than that his manner of speech is full of hesitation, ahhhs, umms, “in other words”… it’s actually painful to listen to him.</p>
<p>Being articulate has several meanings. Only one means being a good orator.
Another one means being able to express oneself clearly and persuasively.<br>
Demosthenes had a speech impediment and had to practice (supposedly speaking through pebbles in his mouth) to speak. But that was different from his ability to convey his thoughts and to persuade his audience. That was eloquent.</p>
<p>Many a writer is extremely articulate in writing but poor at public speaking. I’ve had profs who wrote beautifully but interspersed their lectures with ahhs, umms, did not finish their sentences, etc… I had never any doubt of their intelligence and their ability to present their arguments cogently and persuasively.</p>
<p>“Being articulate has several meanings” It may have several meanings to you. Based on Merriam Webster’s definition it means “expressing oneself readily, clearly, or effectively” which Obama clearly does not when he is in a non-scripted delivery.</p>
<p>Poor Novak. Imagine him being “used.” :rolleyes:</p>
<p>“expressing oneself” can take different forms, one of which is oral. That is what I was trying to convey. He has shown in his non-ghost written books that he is fully capable of being clear and effective. McCain’s and both Clintons’s books were written by someone else. Hillary Clinton was so afraid of go off point that she did not always answer the actual question, or used the question to repeat whatever message she had decided on. McCain did the same on the Meredith Vieira interview this morning, but misspoke anyway. Obama actually thinks through both the question and his answer and does not often commit gaffes (the 57 states being a rare instance).</p>
<p>I engage is public speaking occasionally; and I come across differently when I speak in public, engage in a friendly conversation, or when I write. The other point I wanted to make was that oratorical skills are not necessarily a sign of great knowledge or deep intelligence or profound wisdom. The worst public speaker among my profs was the most learned in numerous languages.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Come on… You can’t be serious? The same thing can be said about anyone doing anything. </p>
<p>Of course when you look at people’s past actions it’s easy to understand how they ended up where they are in the present. However, to say that they knew how each of their decisions would affect them in the future is a bit foolish.</p>
<p>Newjack you defend Obama by slamming other people. I am willing and open to hear what you believe makes him worthy on a national level. Please no rhetoric about change. Show me how he will accomplish everything he promises on my stupid, naive, ignorant level. I have included from [Politics</a>, Political News, Campaign 2008 - Politico.com](<a href=“http://www.politico.com%5DPolitics”>http://www.politico.com) the points I would love to see your responses on why he has changed his positions on since starting his campaign</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is not about being an Obama hater, it is about for many of us saying that a man who says he is for changing the way politics are played he definetly is playing politics as usual.</p>
<p>I really have to disagree with that, jack. There are people who have devoted their lives to the service of others, a cause, their country, etc. and don’t seek personal power at all. Then there are people who devote their lives to the same, but end up being drafted into positions of power, or decide to seek it, due to their extraordinary performance or experience (such as McCain). Then there are people, like BHO, who have planned out their entire lives for one ultimate purpose: power over others, without having achieved any record of accomplishment whatsoever. I don’t have much respect for those kinds of people.</p>
<p>I just realized that McCain was in NH, where Romney has a summer home, so in a 5 day period McCain met or will have met with Romney Guiliani and Jindal. Someone pm’d me saying they thought it was going to be Romney, I think they might be right.</p>
<p>Another tidbit from [DRUDGE</a> REPORT 2008®](<a href=“http://www.drudgereport.com%5DDRUDGE”>http://www.drudgereport.com)
</p>
<p>I just can’t believe Edwards is on the list again. The other person is Nunn</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Whoever wrote this can’t have read Obama’s books or followed his career. See this Wapo article from February 9 2007 (in other words, not post Supreme Court): </p>
<p>
[Obama</a> Forged Political Mettle In Illinois Capitol - washingtonpost.com](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262_pf.html]Obama”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262_pf.html)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In what way does that make him a flip flopper? I fully expected this of him since as a community organizer he worked closely with churches (and that’s how he came to join Trinity–which does extensive community work.</p>
<p>That article is not worth the bandwidth it’s taking, b&p.</p>
<p>Is the presidency a reward for past accomplishments or do past accomplishments help gauge a person’s fitness to be president, but need not be the only gauge? Wisdom, intelligence, the ability to work with others, to motivate others, to make hard choices, these are some of the traits that I look for. They can be demonstrated by a person’s curriculum vitae, but looking at cvs is not the only way to choose a president, a colleague or an employee.</p>
<p>Marite the post article was dated in Feb 07, the politico article was dated 7/05/08 by the AP. That is why I am criticizing his changes. Your other article is also 07, again the AP article was only 17 days ago not 17 months for both of your references</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Whatever… You just don’t like Obama. Just say it. This is one of the most dumb reasons I have heard for not liking Obama.</p>
<p>Also, you completely disregarded my post. I said, “The same thing can be said about anyone doing anything.” </p>
<p>Since you seem not to get it I’ll provide an example. Would you think it would be fair for people to say that John McCain had been planning to run for president ever since his days in the Navy during Vietnam? What if someone tried to make the case that McCain’s decision to refuse early release was rooted in his political ambitions? More extreme, what if someone said Obama coordinated his father’s leaving his family so that he could create a more interesting background story?</p>
<p>Again, “Of course when you look at people’s past actions it’s easy to understand how they ended up where they are in the present. However, to say that they knew how each of their decisions would affect them in the future is a bit foolish.”</p>
<p>b&p: This is precisely why I quoted an article that dates from 2007. It shows, contra the politico article, that Obama is NOT against the death penalty. Sorry, the politico article is flat wrong.</p>
<p>Ilsa: I agree that BO comes across as rather humorless. On the other hand, he does not fly off the handle the way McCain does. BO is known for not letting himself be flustered. I like people who can laugh at themselves. But I also like my president to be in control of himself.</p>
<p>Oh well, I take solace in the fact that I’m not the only “foolish” one out there. :)</p>
<p>I understand what you’re saying, marite. That’s what I thought of Obama at first. But I, like many others, have changed my mind about him. The criticism about him from the msm is beginning to be interesting. I don’t think BHO will like it; that’s another point in favor of McCain in my book–he seems to have a sense of humor about himself. BHO sure doesn’t.</p>