Comments on: The Political Pop Star

By: runasim

runasim — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:07:01 +0000

The crowds at Obama's speech would have been bigger if the State Dept, hadn't banned all its staff and all contractors AND their families from attending.
When I read abou that, I began to think about he Pentagon cancelling Obama's visit a the base in a different light.

The WH is flexing its political muscles again, in a manner I've grown to despise.

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 01:46:12 +0000

Michael Jackson?

By: Neocon

Neocon — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:54:16 +0000

The speech was a success because few people really bothered to read between the lines

And therein lies Obama's success. No one actually bothers to understand what he is saying. He's just not Bush or Clinton and so that makes it irrelevant what he says.

But polls are suggesting that maybe people are starting to pay attention.

By: Rambie

Rambie — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:41:25 +0000

After the last 8 years of this administration it's refreshing to see someone who can actually make a speech and recall facts in the correct order.

"The Republicans are going to blast him either way "

Well, of course they are.

By: runasim

runasim — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:41:17 +0000

Bottom line: Obama didn't say everthing everyone wanted in exactly the way they wanted.
Get in line.

In the meantime, he generated a spirit of hope and renewal while American flags waved in a European capital. When was the last time that happened?

Let's not lose sight of the forest for the sake of the trees.
Relax. Enjoy the moment.

By: Rudi

Rudi — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:17:02 +0000

I wonder if McClown or Bushie understand Tony's definitions of socialism and Communism? When does state ownership, Canada and Britian in the 1970's and 80's, Brazilian Scandanavian oil and energy companies of today, cross the line to full blown totalitarism/Communism?

By: Loviatar

Loviatar — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:07:48 +0000

Tony,

I believe Obama's speech was deliberately "lacking in bringing something new to the table" because he did not want to seem as if he was the President making a major policy speech. He was caught between the Scylla of making a major political speech and the Charybdis of infringing upon Presidential prerogative.

The Republicans are going to blast him either way - - i.e. as an empty suit who can only make speeches or as an overly ambitious politician who has taken Presidential privileges. Glad to see you fell in line with their talk track. ;>)

P.S.

Can we do something about Silly (Silhouette), I tell you as a former Hillary Clinton supporter who is not supporting Obama I am embarrassed for and by Silly.

Silly, please give it up, find a corner somewhere and go sulk, quietly.

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:05:10 +0000

"The speech was a success because few people really bothered to read between the lines."

It's feel-good, sound-bite-based, slick packaging and it's quite successful.

Regarding Michael Jackson (or, say, Madonna), yes,Obama is a star in the eyes of his followers in much the same way (he has been Adopted and more) but he is seen in the USA as quite competent, despite the still-fluffy nature of his campaign.

By: Silhouette

Silhouette — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:44:40 +0000

Yes. Barack Obama is very adept and successful…

at speeches…

unfortunately the job he's applying for requires speechifying as an adjunct, and not the main qualifications. People tend to forget that. Quite a lot actually.

By: ChrisWWW

ChrisWWW — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:05:18 +0000

Let me be picky right back.

The Communists in the Soviet Union (Lenin & Stalin) already won the battle against the true Socialists long before United States even entered the ideological debate on the global stage.