<p>J"It’s like Certs–it’s both! It’s a baseless attack that gave Obama the opportunity to make an important speech on an important topic"</p>
<p>Oh trying to get it both ways! Sorry, that doesn’t work. If it wasn’t an important issue, then the speech was meaningless. Do you really expect someone to be elected president without significant debate and discussion?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Re the NYT piece I posted, it was not an “Op-Ed” piece. It was the lead editorial in today’s paper. It thus represented not a “writer’s opinion” but rather the view of the NYT editorial board.</p>
<p>I believe The Speech was successful at shoring up the support of shaky Democrats rattled by the video of the reverend’s political sermons and the implication that Obama was not what he seemed. Whether he won over the undecideds and the more conservative “Reagan Democrats” remains to be seen.<br>
But it’s going to be a much closer election — no where near landslide territory — than it would have been without the Wright factor. </p>
<p>As for what the “evil doers” will do, brace yourself. The slime machine eviscerated and emasculated Kerry — a decorated veteran who at least put himself in harm’s way in combat — by painting him as a effete overly intellectual Brahmin with a French wife. What’s happened to Obama so far is NOTHING compared to what will be slung if he is the Democratic nominee.</p>
<p>Okay, but that is still not based on what people are thinking or stating, it’s based on the opinion of the editorial board. They are not going out and asking people on the street.</p>
<p>Actions speak louder than words. Senator Obama would be an outstanding White House Press Secretary.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So the fact that in his entire career as a senator he never had his bill on one name. Or the fact that he was going to be the President who would deal with environmental issues (buying a hybrid), but he owned SUV’s prior and during the election. I lived in DC at the time he could have had a Prius by that time. It had nothing to do with picking the wrong VP, (Edwards did not even carry NC). It also had nothing to do with what he said when he returned from the war. Or how his docs didn’t match up with what he said. The Swiftboaters, who served with him, came out and said, they served with him, and they showed the real facts that the DOD also released when they released Kerry’s records.</p>
<p>Kerry didn’t lose only because of the Swiftboaters, he lost it because he was not pro-active in his career</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Yeah, and Irish Protestants probably hate him for being a closet Irish Catholic because his name is similar to O’Bama.</p>
<p>Back to Obama, he’s clearly a liberal, but since the Supreme Court is clearly no longer liberal and Congress is pretty much middle of the road, I doubt much of the liberal agenda will actually get passed. At best, I hope for some improvements in health care.</p>
<p>“Oh trying to get it both ways! Sorry, that doesn’t work. If it wasn’t an important issue, then the speech was meaningless. Do you really expect someone to be elected president without significant debate and discussion?”</p>
<p>I may sound like Bill Clinton, but I’m not sure what you mean by “it.” I certainly think that race in America is an important issue. I don’t think that Wright’s statements themselves are very important, though. I suppose that dealing with them was important to the health of Obama’s campaign, so he had to address them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LOL!! Hunt. :)</p>
<p>Out of curiosity, do you realize according to the GAO, your fed taxes would have to go up 44% to pay for the plan.</p>
<p>Thus, what improvement do you want? And have you ever been in a Nationalized Health Care Program/Country? I have, it is not pretty! Our Medicaid/care is better then the program they have in the UK</p>
<p>Do they still make Certs?</p>
<p>I may sound like Bill Clinton, but I’m not sure what you mean by “it.” "</p>
<p>I thought we were discussing whether this is a legitimate issue or a republican “slime” attack. It can’t be both.</p>
<p>Well, now I don’t know what you mean by “this.” If you mean picking a few isolated statements out of hundreds of sermons, and attempting to suggest that they somehow reveal that Obama is an anti-white racist, then yes, I think it’s a slime attack. If by “this” you mean what Obama actually talked about in his speech, then I think it’s a legitimate issue.
Edited to add: I also think it’s legitimate, and maybe essential, to respond to a slime attack: I think Kerry’s failure to do so was one of the factors that contributed to his defeat.</p>
<p>"If you mean picking a few isolated statements out of hundreds of sermons, and attempting to suggest that they somehow reveal that Obama is an anti-white racist, then yes, I think it’s a slime attack. "</p>
<p>Stop twisting. This issue did not come from republicans, it came from the mainstream media as a whole, with a particular hat-tip to ABC. I don’t understand the necessity of that spin in a cordial debate among fellow community members. You aren’t bothered by Pastor Wright. Neither am I. You don’t think Senator Obama is racist. I don’t either. You should be happy this came out now and could be addressed in a way that you are happy with. Better now than October.</p>
<p>I live in a U.S. STATE with a single-payor option for state employees for 25 years, and it is spectacularly good. NO waiitng lists (unlike the rest of the U.S. which has longer waiting lists for cancer surgery - for those with insurance - than Canada has for elective surgery. My premium is one-third than the private plans - for the same set of services. No previous condition clauses. I get to choose my provider, and providers get to compete on the basis of quality. Customer satisfaction averages 15% than the best rated private plan.</p>
<p>I have LIVED single-payor, and it works.</p>
<p>I am sorry if my response seems uncordial, but I just don’t get the idea that it’s somehow inconsistent to say that Obama gave a speech on a major issue, while thinking that the “issue” of Wright’s statements is grossly overblown, and is being pushed by people who know it’s overblown (and I don’t mean you on that point, zoosermom). Maybe I’ve read too much rhetoric about this elsewhere–I’m sorry if my reaction to that seeped into my comments here.</p>
<p>“I have LIVED single-payor, and it works.”</p>
<p>Yeah, but that doesn’t make it any less communist, and stuff.</p>
<p>bullet – we’ve lost a lot of our hope, and more important many foreigners have lost all their hope in us. I personally work in a huge multinational company and we’re seeing more and more Europeans/South Americans returning home. The reason we have so many illegal “aliens” (as if a human can be an alien, lol) is that there are still places with less hope than here.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Key words are state employees, this doesn’t include universal. Universal would be comparable to the uninsured pool. You are employed, thus, you have insurance. This is for national coverage, so even if you are state, federal, military, blue cross, etc, your federal taxes will go up to cover thos who are not covered by Medicaid or care</p>