Obama’s speech scores with voters, as ‘celebrity’ critique doesn’t register

Printer-friendly versionSend to friendDenver – Amidst the fireworks and the confetti, Senator Barack Obama, the new Democratic presidential nominee, looked confident as he walked off stage. The speech he gave last night was not typical for him – soaring rhetoric was not the focus and it was heavier than usual on policy – but the crowd was roaring. And judging from the responses from some of our Patchwork Nation communities the night was a hit. In the end, Obama chose not to give a big thematic speech, but rather a speech with a lot pieces. There was some ode to the middle class, a bit of biography, a good slice of agenda, and some shots at McCain. It threw out lines and ideas that were clearly aimed at the party faithful – education, corporate responsibility, health care for all. But it was also a disarming speech, one that directly hit on some of the areas McCain has been trumpeting – cutting programs, eliminating bureaucracy, supporting nuclear power. And if indeed the speech was more “workman like” – the phrase that Obama’s team had pounded into the heads of the press over the last few days – it may have been because the campaign believed the “soaring” part of the evening would be handle by the visual. On TV and in person, it was. The images of thousands of American flags and signs set off by the constant twinkling flash of cameras and set to the sound of a roaring crowd made a powerful backdrop. And in stadium-rock fashion Sheryl Crow and Stevie Wonder warmed up the crowd or more than 80,000. For the Obama campaign, it wasn’t all about the TV moments though. There were all sorts of ways for them to gather information about the supporters at Invesco Field. They invited the crowd to text message the campaign with their reasons for supporting Obama. They asked he assembled to text message to make stars on a map on the stadium's big screen light up and grow. And anyone buying a button or hat or t-shirt from the “Official Obama Store” had to fill out a contribution form that gathered data like street and email addresses and phone numbers. Can the uber-organized Obama camp find ways to further their organization and gather more donations? Yes, they can! Outside of the stadium though and in the living rooms our Patchwork Nation communities the speech seems to have been seen as a success overall. Despite the attacks of Senator John McCain to discredit Obama as a mere “celebrity,” none of the people from our communities, even Obama’s critics, were taken aback by the stadium setting – or even mentioned it. “Seeing Obama's speech tonight, I was reminded that a national leader can have the ability to inspire people, to motivate them to do their best,” wrote James Rickman, a Patchwork Nation blogger in Los Alamos, New Mexico (our “Monied Burbs” community). “Obama may get criticized for being a "personality," but what's wrong with that?  It's about time this nation had a "personality" at the helm to help us get back on track.” In Nixa, Missouri, (our “Evangelical Epicenters” community), people who gathered to watch the speech responded to its policy aspects. “I think that it was a wise choice for Obama to talk about policy, rather than just the soaring rhetoric of the past. It went over well among Christian County Democrats,” said John Schmalzbauer, one of our Nixa bloggers. Michael O’Brien, a recent graduate from the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor (our “Campus and Careers” community) wrote in an email that he thought the speech was “a little long” and thought it “glossed over” Iraq. Overall, though, he wrote, “the guy can clearly speak.” “Obama did a lot to emphasize humility, which was incredibly smart,” O’Brien wrote. “Two great lines on this front:  "The promise is the only reason I am standing here tonight;"   "This election has never been about me. It's about you." Down in Clermont, Florida, however, (the community that represents “Emptying Nests” locales) Ann Dupee, one of our Patchwork Nation bloggers there, was worried about the costs of Obama’s proposals. “I am surprised that Barrack praised his grandparents who knew what hard work was [but] did not push that theme, rather [it was] everything for everyone except the fat cats,” she wrote. What this means when viewed through all our Patchwork Nation communities, remains to be seen, of course. And instant snapshots are just that, quick captures of a moment. Over time those thoughts and opinions can change. That’s something we’ll be watching in the coming days and weeks. But despite the lack of a big thematic discussion Thursday, Obama’s focus on policy will likely help him with voters who told us they didn’t know what exactly Obama wanted to do or who exactly he was. And in a larger sense, the last four days in Denver probably helped introduce the Illinois senator in the places he needed it.

Comments

I agree with you 100% -

I agree with you 100% - things happen for a reason. I found this by accident and noticed that we have some things in common. Thats what I love about the Internet, every blog is like a box of chocolates :) Thanks - Great blog.

Mustang, You've been so

Mustang, You've been so poisoned by the Deputy Spokesman For the Department of Usury (or DSUD) to the point that you are effectively a zombie! Your plagued mind has thought up Britney Spears which is laughable as well since she is not at all alone in company supporting the likes of Bush and McCain. The same America that believes Parasite Hilton is newsworthy is the same America that elected George Bush twice.... is the same America that watched passively (...some excitedly) as their new, cool high-tech bombs killed hundreds of thousands of people. ....is the same America whose majority population can't even locate their own isolated country on an unmarked map... etc. etc. etc.... Do I need to go on? Lastly mustang, I would doubt that you are even capable of understanding or explaining, even to youself, precisely what a 'conservative voice' is! To whom does this voice speak other than to a legion of imbeciles? ...to people gullible enough to believe that the Earth is flat or that the wolf in sheep's skin is, in fact, a sheep? Next, I look forward to hearing the silenced conservative voice speak on the issues that dog America... or about how this mysterious voice will spring forth from the basements of the White House and come to fix the multitude of problems that it, in fact, brought about.

Has anyone noticed that all

Has anyone noticed that all the pro McCain posts have been deleted? I'm sure this one will be deleted too because it doesn't scream "Obama is the second coming." I just wonder how long it will take for some nefarious democrat to get it deleted. But that is part of the democratic platform. Silence the conservative voice at all costs. Obama will charm the d-gens, who's heroes are Britney and Paris, and get elected to the white house (The 5% that will separate Obama and McCain won't be the educated of this country). Next we'll get the fairness doctrine forced down our throats and the population will be indoctrinated with the socialist movement of this country and there isn't much we can do about it. As the comments on this article point out, the democrats cannot allow the conservative voice to be heard because it may strike a chord with some of the population that isn't dazzled by a rock star.

Remember that Democrats voted

Remember that Democrats voted alongside Republicans to invade Iraq, enact the "Patriot" Act and establish the Department of Homeland (i.e. Fatherland) Security. While a minority of individual politicians may support civil liberties here at home, the two major political parties clearly do not. Free speech is a beautiful thing yet I see a lot of requests to flag posts as inappropriate. If we censor ourselves, are we not doing Big Brother's job for him?

The system practiced in this

The system practiced in this forum, where articles are posted and removed by "Admin" while leaving some follow-ups, and where it seems there are no posted guidelines, and where it seems the decision to remove is made by readers voting down articles they don't like, is in my view very unsound. I'm a moderator of one the largest big-8 Usenet newsgroups (clc++m), so it's a given that I'm not against moderation in principle. It's the implementation I'm talking about. Freedom of speech is meaningless if it only means the freedom say what most everyone is glad to hear, what no more than three people object to. Perhaps CSM should consider some other model than removing articles (automatically?) based on unpopularity. Perhaps, at least, differentiate between general popularity scoring and flagging an article as e.g. ad hominem or off-topic. I suspect that ad hominem attacks, racism and the like are so scarce that it would not be unreasonable to require users who flag an article as such to provide an explanation, and to involve a human in the decision to remove or not. Cheers & hth., - Alf

Umm-Hark, you didn't actually

Umm-Hark, you didn't actually READ what I said-did you. Yes-I have reviewed them ALL-on multiple sites and on sites using statistical analysis tools to reach their conclusions. You have to factor in the identified racial bias in those polls-known as the Bradley factor. This pattern has repeatedly shown up in elections involving African-American candidates since LA Mayor Bradley lost in an election the polls showed him easily winning. The factor for this could be as high as five to seven percent, particularly in the border states. So a statistical "tie" in a border state is, in all likelihood, going to convert to an actual LOSS for Obama in the voting booth.

What a tragedy this election

What a tragedy this election cycle is. For almost eight years, I've been planning a celebration for when George Bush leaves office. I had thought that the Democrats would nominate an acceptable candidate, and we could go about the business of repairing this country. Then, Obama came out of nowhere. At first, before I knew much about him, I had a favorable opinion of him. However, after much research, I found him to be the most deceptive, ruthless and divisive candidate in my lifetime. That is why I will be casting my first ever vote for a Republican for President.

Obama is not totally devoid

Obama is not totally devoid of experience. Here's something I believe Obama knows a lot about; his so-called religion, black liberation theology, as defined by its founder, James H. Cone: (1) "Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community. Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love." (2) “To be Christian is to be one of those whom God has chosen. God has chosen black people." (3) "While it is true that blacks do hate whites, black hatred is not racism." (4) "All white men are responsible for white oppression." (5) "Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man "the devil." (6) "If there is any contemporary meaning of the Antichrist, the white church seems to be a manifestation of it."

David,l'm afraid you haven't

David,l'm afraid you haven't been watching the state polls very closely. They mirror what happened in 2004 except that Obama is consistently ahead in some of those border states this time. See electoral-vote.com for the whole kit and kaboodle of state polls.

This is all about geography

This is all about geography guys. I admit Obama is a better choice at this point than McCain. But the geography says that he is not as strong a candidate as everyone wants to believe, particularly not with Biden. Most of the "toss up" states in this election are not even close if past history is a guide. I really don't see NC, VA, OH, FL, NH or NV as serious risks for Republicans, particularly the southern group. As for New Hampshire, the only time it went democrat in the last 30 years was for a CLINTON. Otherwise it is consistently republican, as is Nevada. Further, most analysts estimate that the racial bias in polls has resulted in actual votes for an African-American candidate being significantly below polled estimates. This would convert Obama's current lead to a real deficit at the polls. If you factor in the past history of racism in American elections (look up the Bradley effect), and the recent Democratic primary exit polls, which overstated Obama's actual share of the final vote in twenty-eight states, you understand why the Pew foundation research center said "[It] did see potential for error based on the people who decline to participate in polls, who...[are]...largely lower-income whites more likely than the population at large to have racially intolerant views." This analysis leaves us with just three real "battlegrounds"-states that have flip-flopped over several elections: New Mexico, Colorado and Iowa. Right now it looks like Obama in new Mexico and Iowa, and past history makes it likely McCain will take Colorado. Given my belief that ALL of the South will go McCain and that the polls are UNDERESTIMATING the true factor of racism when people actually VOTE, McCain will carry all of the Bush 200 states, and will win 278 to 260 in the Electoral College. The only way Obama is ahead right now is if you bury your head in the sand and ingore the fact that too many white Americans from the lower income groups (who Obama has not been carrying) will vote for the white guy-not the black guy. Unfortunately, the democrats have ignored this by packing the convention with upper class delegates who are better educated and wealthier than the average democrat. The fact that is the former confederacy has been controlling the White House since roughly 1976. If Hillary were running, then with Al Gore and Bill Clinton she would have a shot at Arkansas and Tennessee, and she was bound to take New Mexico. That would have broken the Republican stranglehold in the south and would have won. Geographically she was a more viable candidate. Why do you think die hard conservatives like Limbaugh send republicans to vote in open primaries? Where the South goes, so goes the nation. No democrat from the north has carried the election since JFK. LBJ was from Texas, Carter was from Georgia and Clinton was from Arkansas. The democrats have ignored history, and are now doomed, once again, to repeat it. If the democrats want to win, they CANNOT do it with two candidates from the north and/or northeast and they cannot do it by continuing to sacrifice the South. You must have ONE southern state with more than 10 electoral votes, at a minimum, for a democrat to win. Consider: If Al Gore had actually campaigned in and won his home state of Tennessee, he would have won the election-WITHOUT Florida. I'm a pessimist in this election, I've seen to many democrats run the same "battleground" state game and get beaten up. Without one or two southern states they have no hope-and they cannot get them with a black candidate from Illinois. It is unfair, sad, and true, that too many people in this country will not vote for a black man-and those people are underrepresented in current polls. I truly hope I'm wrong, but past history has forced me to anticipate another disappointment.

John, I think for the most

John, I think for the most part I was agreeing with you.

Wyll D, I believe it's been

Wyll D, I believe it's been said that TODAY is John McCain's birthday and absolutely NO one is talking about it. Sarah Palin is a very pretty lady - which is obvious. But I want to give her this credit! And any sane thinking man knows full well that a mother of five should be just that.... a full-time mother. Our country is further embarrassing itself for putting on this disgusting act in suggesting that this woman is even remotely qualified to aid in fixing the damage that has been done to America. Youtube videos already show her recent remarks that SHE doesn't even know exactly what the Vice President's job is! Reread the last sentence if you MISSED it! My heart is to her as a mother to her children but... as VP... You can forget it. And to Fred Jones, I too was a strong supporter of Hillary way before it became obvious that Barack Obama had a chance. The problem with Hillary is that her actions (including her actions behind the scenes) created a hotbed that was sure to damage not just Obama but the entire Democratic Party in general. This was incredibly foolish on Hillary's part and we all wish she would have had the common sense not to. She gave Obama NO choice but to pick someone other than her - which is something I dearly wished she had NOT done. But this was something that SHE had done.

Fred, (No disrepect

Fred, (No disrepect intended) why does Obama need to be stopped? What is it that he's doing that McCain is not?

As a strong Hillary Clinton

As a strong Hillary Clinton supporter, I feel terribly for her right now. She is forced by party protocol to endorse a man she knows is the worst Presidential candidate in modern history, while she has to watch the Republicans nominate a woman as VP. Still, Obama must be stopped, and I am very pleased with McCain's choice for Vice President.

John, It would seem that he

John, It would seem that he could pick any woman and he chose a pretty one. However, her views seem to be significant as well. Pro-life helps with the religious right. Pro-military fuels the next imperial conquest. I agree with you about the inexperience factor though. What's the average life span of men in America? I'm thinking it's not much more than 76 years old. Sarah Palin's chances of becoming president, if John McCain is elected, are pretty good. She's a risk.

Hey Fred, Why are my

Hey Fred, Why are my statements moronic? What I find most impressive is that the general response to McCain's VP pick is ignoring the fact that McCain may have chosen Palin simply because she is pretty. What other motive could there be to choose an inexperienced, beautiful mother of FIVE children (one a newborn with Down Syndrome) to serve the country in such telling times? If he were to purchase a souped-up sports convertible to drive around at age 72, would you not see the link? And, by the way, have you noticed John McCain eyeing the rear of Sarah Palin from behind as she speaks in her introductory speech?

Tye, it is you. And by the

Tye, it is you. And by the way, Mr. Sexist, why doesn't Obama have to stay home with his children? What's the difference?

NOW IS IT ME OR IS MCCAIN TO

NOW IS IT ME OR IS MCCAIN TO DAMN OLD TO BE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT? THE ONLY REASON HE CHOSE THAT WOMAN IS TO TRY AND GET MORE VOTES BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN!!! NOT GON WORK THE ELECTION IS ALREADY WON BABY! WHAT SHE NEED TO BE DOING IS FOCUSING ON HER ILL CHILD! THERE IS NO WAY SHE IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN HER CHILDS NEEDS AND BE VP??!!! HATS OFF TO HER AND HER DETERMINATION BUT ITS A STRADEGY AND IT SEEMS NOT TO BE WORKING ATLEAST FOR ME ANYWAY! I JUST FEEL THAT SHE NEEDS TO FOCUS ON HER BABY THAN TO WORRY ABOUT THE MESS THAT IS GOING ON IN WASHINGTON!!!

You know Democrats are

You know Democrats are getting scared when they make the kind of moronic statements of John and some other on this blog. Obama - US Senator for 143 days Palin - Governor for 2 years (executive experience) Who is more experienced? HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTERS FOR SARAH PALIN 08

[...] TimesFierce Urgency

[...] TimesFierce Urgency NewsweekThe Associated Press - Dallas Morning News - Washington Post - Christian Science Monitorall 3,684 news [...]

Maybe I should repeat this

Maybe I should repeat this !!!!!!! JOHN MCCAIN TAKE REPEATED GLANCES AT SARAH PALIN'S REAR AS SHE GIVES HER SPEECH !!!!!! HAS ANY ONE ELSE NOTICED THIS?

TO THE IDIOT BARRY CONTRELL U

TO THE IDIOT BARRY CONTRELL U ARE A RACIST! THAT'S XACTLY WHY OBAMA WILL BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT MARK MY WORD! YOU AND THE REST OF YOUR KIND GET READY TO CRY YOUR OWN DAMN TEARS! YOU THINK YOU OWN EVRYTHING BUT IT'S BOUT TO CHANGE BELIEVE THAT!!!! SO IN CLOSING MAY THE BEST MAN WIN AND WE ALREADY KNOW WHO THAT IS!!!!!

Obama - US Senator for 143

Obama - US Senator for 143 days Palin - Governor for 2 years (executive experience) Who is more experienced? HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTERS FOR SARAH PALIN 08

WOW!!!!!! I guessed above

WOW!!!!!! I guessed above that John McCain was going to pick Lieberman as his running mate... and, boy, was I WRONG!!! HAHAHAHAHA John McCain has chosen an inexperience FOX to be his VP pick!!! I mean.... She is so attractive that the media, at this point, seem almost afraid to even mention her super model, knock-out look! ... as if they aren't noticing it! ...LOL.... This has MONICA LEWINSKY written all over it!!!!! And.... if you DON'T BELIEVE ME!!!! THERE IS ALREADY EVIDENCE.... John McCain literally LOOKS DIRECTLY DOWN taking repeated PEAK AFTER PEAK of her rear as Palin introduces herself!!! If you don't believe me you can see this for yourself as the beautiful, innocent mother of five - Sarah Palin - is playing all over the networks right now!!!

To Carson Drew: I agree that

To Carson Drew: I agree that it is a discouraging system. I think the worst thing that could happen this election is that Barack Obama gets into office and we all find out he is bought and paid for by moneyed-interests (a concern shared by some of our founding father, although obviously not a concern founding fathers had about Barack Obama specifically.) I personally would like to see more democracy. I personally think we should start lottery-ing our national offices based on a stratified, random selection process. The faces hiding behind corporations hiding behind other corporations are what worry me. However, I realize my lottery idea is too radical for many Americans and I believe it is because we don't trust one another. That's just kind of sad though and it doesn't have to be that way. Outside of that, violent revolution would be the only other option; however, no revolution, that I'm aware of, has solved any problems. Revolution generally only brings back the same problems with different faces.

Wyll, You think the problem

Wyll, You think the problem can be solved by creating a new political party within the same rotten system. I would disagree. Even if Barack wins, usually in our system the nice guy finishes last and most nice guys (and gals) refuse to enter the cesspool that our American political system has become.

To Carson Drew: Agreed.

To Carson Drew: Agreed. In his book "Do I Stand Alone," Jesse Ventura makes a strong argument for needing a viable third party in this country. His premise rests on that majority of Americans who are not represented in the current system and choose not to vote (I believe it is a choice even if only a passive one.) I think he may be onto something.

C.E.P, I think the fellow

C.E.P, I think the fellow KURT answered nicely your remark about McCain wanting to be president: “I didn’t decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be president because it had become my ambition to be president. . . . In truth, I’d had the ambition for a long time.” (Worth Fighting For, by John McCain). AS AN OBAMA SUPPORTER I CAN PROUDLY SAY THAT MY CANDIDATE HAS HANDILY TROUNCED MCCAIN. BARACK OBAMA WANTED TO BE PRESIDENT SINCE HE WAS 4 OR 5 YEARS OLD. BARACK IS FAR MORE DEDICATED TO BECOMING PRESIDENT THAT THE OLD GEEZER JOHN MCCAIN EVER WAS. CASE CLOSED. BARACK WINS ON THIS ONE.

CHUCKLES: Actually I knew

CHUCKLES: Actually I knew that C.E.P. had no argument to my remark about Pakistan when he conveniently ignored it the first time around.

I believe C.E.P has just

I believe C.E.P has just shown all of us that democrats, once backed into a corner, will opt out........ and I can't say that's a bad strategy when you don't have an answer!!!!! Cheerio

Wyll, you summarized it in a

Wyll, you summarized it in a nutshell: "On another note, I have to ask: if political promises will never come to be why do we bother to vote at all? " As you probably know, the majority of eligible American voters no longer vote for President. Fewer still vote for lower offices. For local offices, the turnout rate is often as low as 10-15%. The reason? You gave it to us. All politicians, of all parties, end up promising the moon or whatever they have to, to get their hands on the power throttle. The majority of Americans have seen that, they see that you can't believe a thing any politician says, no matter if Dem or Repub, and they've opted out of the system.

bullfeathers said without

bullfeathers said without replying to McCain's stated purpose for wanting to be President. "I’m confused." Thats obvious, your backing McCain! And with that I will make your day and go do something to further my political ambitions. Can I count on your vote?

To Derrick: I acknowledge

To Derrick: I acknowledge that you have taken one thing Obama said last night and critiqued it (i.e. 90% voting record.) However, after that you haven't really addressed anything else in my post even though your comment appears to be directed at me. I commented on Obama not using personal attack politics, I never said Obama wasn't playing politics. Running for president is politics. On another note, I have to ask: if political promises will never come to be why do we bother to vote at all? We might as well have a monarchy or military junta then. I'm familiar with the electoral process, campaigning and jaded-citizen-dissatisfaction (I'm there- trust me on that;) but your charges must be leveled at both Republicans and Democrats then. It isn't as if one party has been clearly demonstrated to be more likely to fulfill their campaign promises than the other. At this point in the process, you pretty much have to take them at their words unless you have some other compelling reason to doubt them. As for me having bought into the "Obama aura," he is inspiring people. I don't hear many people leveling that charge at McCain. I personally want people to be inspired. I'd like to see people do something more than they are today. What about you? Regarding McCain's maverick credentials, I think he lost those about the time he started courting the religious right. If you'll remember back to 2004, McCain openly rejected the support of the religious right and that was one of several policy choices that made him a maverick. McCain's a different candidate this time and trying to maintain the maverick image is the propaganda being espoused by his party.

“I didn’t decide to run for

“I didn’t decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be president because it had become my ambition to be president. . . . In truth, I’d had the ambition for a long time.” (Worth Fighting For, by John McCain). AS AN OBAMA SUPPORTER I CAN PROUDLY SAY THAT MY CANDIDATE HAS HANDILY TROUNCED MCCAIN. BARACK OBAMA WANTED TO BE PRESIDENT SINCE HE WAS 4 OR 5 YEARS OLD. BARACK IS FAR MORE DEDICATED TO BECOMING PRESIDENT THAT THE OLD GEEZER JOHN MCCAIN EVER WAS. CASE CLOSED. BARACK WINS ON THIS ONE.

TO C.E.P.: Maybe I was

TO C.E.P.: Maybe I was mistaken. Maybe I didn't hear last night Barack Obama talking about (for the second time that I know of) going into Pakistan to get Osama bin Laden since Bush didn't do it. Are you saying that it was actually HJohn McCain who said this last night? Or are you saying that Obama didn't actually mean it when he said it last night - that it was just politics to win votes? I'm confused.

Dangedif John McCain didn't

Dangedif John McCain didn't show his maverick streak today and shows that he's not part of the Washington establishment! "Sarah Palin, the first-term governor of Alaska, has no experience in Washington and is unknown in national politics. She will be the least experienced candidate for national office nominated by a major party since Richard Nixon picked the first-term Maryland governor, Spiro Agnew, as his running mate in 1968." -USA Today With McCain hovering around age 72. the chances are excellent that we'll have our first woman president before the next 8 years have elapsed and she'll be experienced by then. The action revolution the Democrats could have achieved and wouldn't (first woman president) has been picked up spectacularly by the Republican party and delivered in the form of what would not only be the first woman VP of the USA but also soon enough, the first woman president. This lady's smart, friends. Really, really smart.

"quote the less important

"quote the less important words of another poster, and ‘conveniently forget’ about the bottom line conclusion -" That conclusion is so flawed in comparison that I didnt deem it worthy of a answer. But you insisted so. “Barack Obama may well get us into the worst war we’ve ever had - armed confrontation with Pakistan, a known nuclear power. That will make Iraq look like child’s play… and we still may not find the man in the cave who continues to elude the most powerful nation on earth after 7 years.” McCain is the hot head that would lead us down that path. Republicans first wanted to say Obama was weak, now they want to claim he is reckless. McCain voted as Bush did at the least 90% of the time,(check the facts Derrick, McCain doesnt deny it, he avoids it) I think that shows were his heart is. I think your conclusion is a scare tactic and far from the reality of the situation. Since your asking me my opinion. I'd like your opinion on this. I have asked before but no one here has the moxie to touch it. Perhaps you will? "I didn't decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be president because it had become my ambition to be president. . . . In truth, I'd had the ambition for a long time." (Worth Fighting For, by John McCain). What has changed? He's older and this may really be his last chance?

To a 'Wise Old Man'. You

To a 'Wise Old Man'. You stated that I'm too young to know about these things. Yes, I am 'only' 38, but I do not grossly exaggerate the state of our nation. I lived overseas half of my life, not as a military person, but because I wanted to know how other cultures live first-hand. I have personally experienced the world-wide disgust over the Bush administration's policies. I didn't compare this recession to the Great Depression so I don't feel I'm grossly exaggerating that either. As to the change Obama would bring... I welcome that with fervor, hope, and open arms. It's far past time for that change you're so afraid of. You might be too old to see that.

Wyll, you've bought into the

Wyll, you've bought into the Obama aura. Consider this nonsense that McCain has voted 90% of the time with Bush. My first confusion is what legislation has George Bush introduced in Congress that McCain could 'vote with Bush' on? It was well known until this campaign that Bush and McCain detested each other - that McCain was sought briefly as Kerry's running mate in 2004. McCain did have the reputation as a maverick because he was often uncooperative with other Republicans on legislation the didn't agree with. Yet, all that has conveniently been swept under the carpet because it destroys the notion that is so important right now for Obama to plant into the minds of Americans - that McCain is another 4 years of Bush. Barack Obama CAN NOT WIN unless he convinces the American voters of that. So whatever the facts may be to the contrary, THAT is the notion that Obama pushed last night, and must continue to push. So don't even begin to try and convince thinking people that Barack Obama isn't playing politics as much as the next politican, whether Republican or Democrat. The most remarkable thing of all in our great country is that the vast majority of our citizens can be coerced and propagandized into becoming partisan. Not only that, they actually believe that political promises will come to be, even though they hardly ever have.

"C.E.F., you must be retired

"C.E.F., you must be retired with way too much time on your hands. You’re taking this forum far too seriously! Don’t you know that typing away on the internet is an excuse to not do anything useful on behalf of our candidates or our nation?" C.E.P. not C.E.F. You have absolutely no idea of who I am or what I do or dont do. Retired you ask. Holiday weekend and vacation I might reply. Politically what I do or dont do, again you have no way of knowing. My candidate is supported by me in many ways, as is the election process. Speaking out in a group is another way. I'll assume your asking means you are not a moderator here?

TO C.E.P : Honestly. Are

TO C.E.P : Honestly. Are you a politician? If not, have you ever considered running for an elective office? I'm inquiring because only politicians would quote the less important words of another poster, and 'conveniently forget' about the bottom line conclusion - which I'm repeating below: "Barack Obama may well get us into the worst war we’ve ever had - armed confrontation with Pakistan, a known nuclear power. That will make Iraq look like child’s play… and we still may not find the man in the cave who continues to elude the most powerful nation on earth after 7 years."

I watched Obama's speech

I watched Obama's speech twice last night because we had someone arrive at our house after the speech had ended. Barack was clear and pointed. He brought up issues ranging from education to social security (symbolically American citizen's birth to death.) Obama offered a clear and concise critique of John McCain's policies. Obama offered solutions and, yes, hope. Better yet, his speech was inspiring. Many posts on this site completely veer away from the topic at hand. What did you think of Barack Obama's speech? If you are intellectually honest, be gentle because McCain must speak next week. Will he inspire hope? Maybe. Will John offer a clear and concise critique of Barack Obama's policies? Maybe. What will John McCain say and how many people will be there? We don't know and therefore we'll have to wait, but this isn't a ******* contest to see who can whiz the farthest. This process influences the future of our country. I don't know about you, but hope in the future is not something I consider a bad thing. One piece of Barack Obama's speech I liked the most was his lack of personal attack as campaign strategy. He's been very careful to remain above the mud-slinging (and yes I'm aware he's responded to some negative campaigning with negative campaigning.) On this regard, his speech last night was successful. The ability to violently scream the other party down in public as essentially being 'pinko Commies' led to Nazis gaining control in Germany. The electorate didn't respond soon enough and the rest is history. At times, we don't seem far away from facism in this country. Today, I'd have to point to the Republican party as resembling the NSDAP more than the Democrats though. Divisiveness does not build levees in New Orleans. Name calling does not garner a better education for our children. Calculated character assassination does not create jobs. I believe Obama is right, with regard to political strategies on the national stage (and with each other,) when he suggests political strategies are in need of revision. We need to talk with one another rather than yell at one another. Can you argue with him on trying to reduce unwanted pregnacies? What is your argument against a gay guy visiting his dying gay boyfriend in the hospital? Where is his logic flawed in the specific areas where he suggests we need compromise? Stop calling each other names and start thinking. Are you an American citizen? What does being a citizen mean to you? Does being a citizen simply mean you shouldn't have to give some of your money to someone who may be undeserving of that 'handout?' I'd hope being an American citizen means more than that. Last night, I had a hard time trying to decide if it was just a good speech or a great speech. This morning, I've firmly decided it was great for only some of the reasons I've listed here. Hopefully John McCain will be able to inspire the same feelings of hope in his party; however, many Republicans (like Rush Limbaugh to name just one) didn't want McCain as the nominee to begin with so that seems unlikely.

C.E.F., you must be retired

C.E.F., you must be retired with way too much time on your hands. You're taking this forum far too seriously! Don't you know that typing away on the internet is an excuse to not do anything useful on behalf of our candidates or our nation?

Any woman like Sarah Palin

Any woman like Sarah Palin who can bear 5 white children in this day and age to populate our country deserves our vote. But you have to get the old wrinkly guy with her! Vote McCain/Palin

bullfeathers said "George

bullfeathers said "George W. Bush once had the highest approval rating of any president in modern times. Richard Nixon won by the largest landslide in American history. You don’t seem like fans of either of those presidents, despite their high popularity." Bushs rating is based on his last 8 years. Lincolns is based on many years of people looking at the history. Big difference. bullfeathers said Lincoln could have allowed the peaceful resolution proposed by the southern states to occur instead of being beligerant like other republicans and getting us into another nasty war. That of course cant be proven and could be debated forever Kathy said "As a former Hillary supporter, I’m now firmly in your camp. Already Obama’s speech of last night is being forgotten." So your voting for the gender of a president and not policies? Another wonderful American. I'd bet your wrong about Hillary and how she will vote. She has more intelligence than to give the country up to the republicans because she didnt win. Too bad you cant do the same.

Jeremiah! Are you saying

Jeremiah! Are you saying that Abraham Lincoln's long and unruly hair was unprofessional and unbecoming of a person running for the office of POTUS?

Jeremiah, I think the point

Jeremiah, I think the point was that even most of us liberals would have a hard time voting for someone for president who looked like Al Sharpton, even if they spoke and thought like Barack Obama.

I'm ecstatic that McCain has

I'm ecstatic that McCain has picked a woman as VP. This is as risky as Mondale picking Ferraro (who was a relative unknown), but you can be sure that Geraldine Ferraro will now be voting for McCain... as will Hillary Clinton... as will a giant percentage of American women. John McCain knows very well a statistic that has somehow escaped Obama: African-Americans make up only about 15% of the American population, whereas women make up a tad over 50!. John McCain, you're on a roll and played your cards very very well! As a former Hillary supporter, I'm now firmly in your camp. Already Obama's speech of last night is being forgotten.

As a moderate that has voted

As a moderate that has voted for Repulicans and Democrats I have to laugh at my right wing friends now touting John McCain (and perhaps Sarah Palin) as their banner bearers. McCain remember was courted as Demo. VP candidate in the last election. Despite JM's pandering to the neo-cons NOW, in his hgeart of hearts he knows greed and avarice when he sees it and he's seen lots of it in the last eight years. As a moderate either way, Obama or McCain, I win and the neo-con ultra right Republican era is TOAST!

C.E.P: George W. Bush once

C.E.P: George W. Bush once had the highest approval rating of any president in modern times. Richard Nixon won by the largest landslide in American history. You don't seem like fans of either of those presidents, despite their high popularity. Let's also NOT use any popularity ratings for Abraham Lincoln to justify the civil war. It cost more American lives than any in our history and was, by far, the bloodiest. We welcome it when Kosovo, Georgia, and blah blah blah-istan become independent spinoff states. Lincoln could have allowed the peaceful resolution proposed by the southern states to occur instead of being beligerant like other republicans and getting us into another nasty war. Barack Obama may well get us into the worst war we've ever had - armed confrontation with Pakistan, a known nuclear power. That will make Iraq look like child's play... and we still may not find the man in the cave who continues to elude the most powerful nation on earth after 7 years.