Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux) [x3! UPDATES * ALL CRITICAL!]

Update [2008-2-20 19:21:37 by susanhu]:

“The one thing his voters can count on is that they will ultimately be disappointed.” Der Spiegelhas it exactly right.

Update [2008-2-20 14:37:51 by susanhu]: Ignore the silly press reports about the Machinist Union president's speech. More here. WATCH THIS VIDEO. Hear about the promises that Obama made to desperate Maytag workers, and how he then took piles of money from the Crown family of Chicago, that owned Maytag -- and the patriarch of that family says that Obama never talked to him about saving the Maytag workers' jobs:

Update [2008-2-20 15:30:41 by susanhu]: I found a Feb. 2 article from McClatchy/Chicago Tribune to which Buffenbarger refers, "Obama's fundraising, rhetoric collide: Union says senator did little to save jobs."

But the union that represented most of those Galesburg workers isn't impressed with Obama's advocacy and has endorsed his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton. Its leaders say they wish he had done more about their members' plight.

What rankles some is what Obama did not do even as he expressed solidarity four years ago with workers mounting a desperate fight to save their jobs.

Obama had a special connection to Maytag: Lester Crown, one of the company's directors and biggest investors whose family, records show, has raised tens of thousands of dollars for Obama's campaigns since 2003. But Crown says Obama never raised the fate of the Galesburg plant with him, and the billionaire industrialist insists any jawboning would have been futile. [BUT OBAMA COULD HAVE TRIED, DAMMIT]

The article also says that Axelrod had no clue that Crown sat on the board of Maytag. Guess they know now.

ORIGINAL: I already showed you a video of a panel of Obama supporters who were unable -- a single one of them -- to name any of Obama's legislative or other accomplishments. But even his elected supporters -- members of Congress and governors (!) -- cannot come up with anything.  (Uh, you'd think that Obama's campaign would send them some talking points? If they can come up with a few?)  (h/t Taylor Marsh and MyDD's "Breaking Blue")

Then there are Congressman Bobby Scott (D-Va) and Governor James Doyle, Jr. (D-Wisc), who can't think of a thing to say about their candidate's qualifications -- along with the concerns of Der Spiegel ("Change You Can't Believe In") and The Economist ("But could he deliver?"):  


Then, I saw one of his supporters - a congressman from Virginia, Bobby Scott - being interviewed. The interviewer noted that the voters couldn't name a single achievement of Mr. Obama, but surely someone in the political arena could. The congressman made a feeble effort to suggest accomplishments but finally fell back on the platitudes and slogans that are Mr. Obama's stock and trade. The congressman said things like "he will bring us together," and "he will get things done." Unfortunately, neither Mr. Obama nor his supporters can tell us what happens after we're all brought together, or how he'll bring us together in the first place. By like token, they can tell us Mr. Obama means change but know little or nothing about what, if anything, will be changed. ... via Philadelphia's The Bulletin

Can you believe that a Congressman didn't have a clue how to express what Obama specifically has to offer? This is not just some ordinary Obama supporter rhapsodizing about Obama's charisma -- this is an elected official!  And he's not the only one.  KCK, a fine diarist and longtime activist writes in "Hillary Rodham, Chair of the Legal Services Corporation" about Wisconsin's governor:

I don't care who you vote for, but you should know why. I just watched the Wisconsin Governor Doyle endorse Obama on Hardball yet when asked what Obama's accomplishments are he stuttered and fell short surprised as if the question wasn't fair. He answered with O's ethics legislation and community org. & said that his kids and wife are for Obama and well he finally decided to join up...

WTF?

Those last two quotes are from my piece, "The Economist: 'But could he deliver?' [UPDATED]." The highly respected Economist magazine dared to bring up the obvious:

"It is time for America to evaluate Obama the potential president, not Obama the phenomenon."

Then there's Der Spiegel:

WEST WING

Change You Can't Believe In

By Gabor Steingart in Washington

The rise of democratic frontrunner Barack Obama signifies an alarming victory of style over substance. Not unlike the dot-com hype, his campaign promises more than he can deliver. The one thing his voters can count on is that they will ultimately be disappointed. ...

Oh will they.  Already, my fellow Hillary supporters, people who write diaries at Daily Kos and know that crowd intimately, are anticipating the crashing drop in respect for Obama should he become president, and fail to fulfill all that they have PROJECTED on to him.  (Most of which Obama, let's be honest, doesn't believe in all that deeply.)

My gut take on Obama, from watching him a lot and observing him closely:  He is all about the win.  He eats up the crowd fervor.  He gets off on it.  It makes him feel powerful and omnipotent.  

His campaign has told people to leave the policy stuff, for those few "wonks" who want it, to some pages on his campaign Web site.  (That's linked at NoQuarter in a recent article.)

But you have to do far more than ride a wave of people's projected hopes.  When you become president, the shit hits the fan, as my mom used to say.

"The one thing his voters can count on is that they will ultimately be disappointed.Der Spiegel has it exactly right.

Tags: Barack Obama, Breaking Blue, Der Spiegel, qualifications, Taylor Marsh, The Economist (all tags)

Comments

114 Comments

Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

Susan: Your excellent diary and this say it all:

http://pictures.aol.com/ap/singleImage.d o?pid=ccb0Y7eF66BT20ZR7viDpigdcfSzsZ2Rkk Nvv4xQp5Fd3Ig%3D

by KnowVox 2008-02-20 04:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

OMG!  That cartoon is priceless.  I'll post it over at NoQuarter later.  

I actually hurt for Obama's supporters -- well, except all the mean ones who've been so cruel and irrational with anyone who dares to support Hillary or question their candidate.  They will be so disillusioned in no time at all.

by susanhu 2008-02-20 04:13AM | 0 recs
Is this a winning strategy?

Calling Obama supporters cruel and irrational? Selling disillusionment? Is this stuff working for you guys? Do you find that people respond to these kind of arguments in a positive way? Or has this all just descended into grouch-fest pity party time and I should just let you all work out your mourning process in your own way?

by Jumbo 2008-02-20 04:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this a winning strategy?

Jumbo, a great many Obama supporters -- particularly at DailyKos -- have been VERY cruel to all of us who support Hillary.  It's horrible.  

It also happens at Taylor Marsh, Politico, MyDD, HuffingtonPost, Steve Clemons' Washington Note, TalkLeft, and on and on.  Several of those sites have had to, at times, shut down comments because the onslaught from the pro-Obama people is so nasty.  Many have to go to the terribly time-consuming trouble of moderating comments, which is a huge drag.  

When someone as decent and fair-minded as Steve Clemons had to shut down comments for a while, it's sad.  Steve stands on his head to be very fair to all the candidates.  He couches every statement with intellectually-expressed qualifiers, just because he's a very careful person about how he expresses himself.  It's not right that people have been so nasty to him.

by susanhu 2008-02-20 04:58AM | 0 recs
Okay

I get it. I'm sorry. I see what this is about. People said mean things to you on the internet. That is a horrible thing. Did they use swear words? That must've been devastating. You're all traumatized. Is this the first time you've been flamed before? I know I once went on a videogame blog and posted how I like my Xbox and all these Playstation 3 fanboys called me terrible names. I still have a grudge against stupid Sony. Dumb jerks and their blu-ray. I know exactly what you're going through.

by Jumbo 2008-02-20 05:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Okay

Is this a video game? Ahhh nooo It's who is going to be POTUS but hey, typical response

by IndyRobin 2008-02-20 05:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Okay

You're totally right. Horrible analogy.  The fact that the POTUS is involved makes the things people say on the internet what, 10 x more important? 1000x?

by Jumbo 2008-02-20 05:43AM | 0 recs
Please don't compare blogs to videogames.

Hillary will try to impose mandatory ratings.

by benmasel 2008-02-20 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Okay

"Trailer trash with an elite college veneer"

Exact quote from a poster, in reference to the Clintons, on TPM yesterday.

Only one of the many lovely things said by Obama supporters over the course of the campaign.

What's the problem with the quote? Not that it will hurt the Clintons personally, it won't. But that it reveals the classism of the now triumphant branch of party. Such attitudes are not compatible with progressive politics. Not at all.

Take a look at the candidate himself -- the video of him taking his "periodically" "feeling down" swipe at Clinton. Look at his face, look at how amused he is with himself, how disdainful he is of his opponent, not as a competitior, but AS A WOMAN. Tell me such disdain has no reprecussions for all the women who have put their trust in this party over the years, and the issues they care about. Don't respond with an insult, or denying what any objective observer can see -- tell me (give me real concrete arguments) why I should continue to allow the party that supports this kind of behavior to take money out of my bank account each month? Why I should vote for this mean-spirted, self-satisfied man at the top of the ticket? Why I should continue to give my time and money to the party to support the overwhelming sexism and classism of the people he represents?

This has nothing to do with the Clintons. Hillary Clinton was my last choice for the nomination. She didn't gain my vote, Barack Obama, by his own behavior, lost it. As for all the Democratic politicians and so-called "progressive" bloggers and supporters who defended him, who refused to stand up to what was happening in the media, who, for instance, went to bat for a media personality who suggested that Clinton had "pimped out" her daughter rather than for the Democrat who was maligned in this dispicable way, they've lost my support too. No more checks, no more "contributions" no more votes. I'm done.

The Republicans are idiots, but frankly, they've never done anything to hurt me personally. As a business owner, If I only voted my own self-interest, I wouldn't have much to complain about. After all, really, what have these fake progressive Democrats ever done for me? Sure, feminist agitation in the 1970s and 80s helped me advance in my career -- but did the party follow through on the health care, child care and pay equity issues those feminist agitated for? No.

The only Democratic politician to pay more than lip service to those issues -- who took care to make his administration "look like America" including an America that actually has women in it, who addressed the issue of family leave, who failed to get comprehensive health care reform passed (defeated not by Republicans, who didn't yet hold the majority in Congress but by spineless fellow Democrats spooked by "harry and louise") but did get expanded health coverage for children passed, who initiated many innovative small and micro-business programs that gave Americans, including many minorities, without access to the usual financing resources an opportunity to become entreprenuers, who oversaw the largest expansion of small business and the increase in domestic job creation that expansion contributed to, etc. -- is denigrated and castigated by these same dolts as no better than Bush. Am I really suppose to support a party this stupid?

Give me some reason why I should. Other than the fact that Obama makes your heart go pitter patter.

 

by esmense 2008-02-20 07:55AM | 0 recs
Absolutely correct.

"She didn't gain my vote, Barack Obama, by his own behavior, lost it."

And then, when I took a second look at Hillary I found that I admire her, support her for her experience and toughness, and thank her for standing up in the face of some of the most vile things that could be said or done to a person.

Like bully kids in a playground at recess.

Where are the adults?  With Hillary Clinton.

by Shazone 2008-02-20 08:09AM | 0 recs
by Jumbo 2008-02-20 08:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Absolutely correct.

What constitutes an adult? Over 65? That is the only age demographic that Hillary has the majority of support in as of late.

by matchles 2008-02-20 08:45AM | 0 recs
I resemble that remark...

well, not quite, but what's wrong with someone over 60?  OH, I FORGOT...we're supposed to step aside.

NOT!

by Shazone 2008-02-20 09:12AM | 0 recs
Re: I resemble that remark...

When did I ever imply that there was something wrong with being over 60?  Just so long as you realize it doesn't entitle you to being the sole purveyor of wisdom.

For example, let me impart a little pop culture widom on you.  It is the wrong decade to use a "Not" joke.  Generally speaking young people no longer broadcast their sarcasm with a statement like "not" or "syke".  Instead they take an attitude that seems to sugggest, "well if they don't get it, I'm not going to explain it to them".  

by matchles 2008-02-20 10:07AM | 0 recs
Oh, golly gee...I'm such an idiot that...

I don't realize that NOT is out of vogue.  

How about Duh?

How about getting a life?

I'm over 60.  A women.  I had a successful career in advertising.  First female Senior Vice President for a large agency.  Ran my own business.  Went to law school in my 40's.  Had a successful career as an immigration attorney.  Am a wife of 36 years.  And a mother of two wonderful adults (who are proud of their country).

And I support Hillary Clinton and am proud to say it.

And yes, my voice and my experience and my vote do cound for something.

by Shazone 2008-02-20 11:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, golly gee...I'm such an idiot that...

Yeah all those are out of style as well.

I never called you an idiot, much less made any personal attacks towards you. I merely pointed out that you aren't an authority simply because of your age.

For the record I'm 25, I've seen most of this country as well as many others.  I have been married for 3 years. I lived and taught english in China for 2 years. I have finished my Bachelors and am currently attending grad school. I have made the best of my time so far and am well on my way to what I would call a successful life.  

My experience, voice and vote count as well and you can't marginalize my opinion because you have lived longer.  

 

by matchles 2008-02-20 12:36PM | 0 recs
I would never marginalize you in ANY way....

even though we "older" folks have been marginalized by Obama and his supporters by your "new generation" talk.

It seems to many that the only thing that counts with you and your friends is youth.  I hope you live to see 60 because I know when you do you will not appreciate being talked down to simply because of ones age.

Good luck with your life.  With Mr. Obama as POTUS, I fear that (IMHO) you're going to need it.

by Shazone 2008-02-20 01:06PM | 0 recs
Re: I would never marginalize you in ANY way....

I'm not talking down to you, nor am I addressing you simply because of your age.  I took issue with your idea that Hillary supporters are the "adults" of the party.  

You support Hillary for your reasons, I support Obama for mine and we should talk about those reasons here. But to me these blogs have lost their way as posters from both sides seem to be happy with just making gross generalizations about the other sides instead of talking about matters of substance.

I disagree with you but that doesn't mean I don't respect you.

by matchles 2008-02-20 01:41PM | 0 recs
we're all supposed to step aside

evidently, I got this comment from an Obama supporter earlier today:

"It's all trivia at this point:  you either accept Barack Obama as the Democratic Nominee, or you're a fucking traitor to the party.

Period.  How's that attitude for you?

by Greuben on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 02:22:32 PM EST "

by Maole 2008-02-20 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: we're all supposed to step aside

I don't want to belong to a party whose new sport is trashing a certain former Democratic president, that any adminstration with some sense would know, is much needed in repairing our world image.

If this new trash-talking party is what we've got, I'm out of it.

I won't be a part of a party which has made the Clintons persona non grata.

by Si Ella Puede 2008-02-20 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: we're all supposed to step aside

Are you a stalker?

I noticed I got a whole raft of troll ratings from your for comments that were in no way shape or form "troll" comments.

by zonk 2008-02-20 12:47PM | 0 recs
Re: we're all supposed to step aside
He is. He gave me a troll rating for comment that wasn't troll worthy. so I gave him a nice round donut in exchange.
by John in Chicago 2008-02-25 05:56PM | 0 recs
You've engaged in TR abuse:

here. Please change that "1" to a "2) and stop engaging in future TR wars which isn't hard to reciprocate.

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-21 02:54PM | 0 recs
Then call me a f*cking traitor, too.

Actually I already have been called that.

So clever, aren't they?

by Shazone 2008-02-20 11:34AM | 0 recs
Re: we're all supposed to step aside

Why are you reducing a candidate to the worst of their supporters?  There are assholes that support every candidate and it is just more defined on here because the anonymity of the internet.  Someone replies with something vulgar, ignore it, they aren't representative of the whole or worth your time.  

by matchles 2008-02-20 12:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Absolutely correct.

and she leads with  actual

DEMOCRATS....

WHAT A MINOR DEMO THAT DEM DEMO IS HUH?

by Seymour Glass 2008-02-20 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Absolutely correct.

Are you talking about that 1% lead Clinton has on Obama among Dems on CNN? With 13% undecided and with in the margin of error, you are right, Obama should step aside, dems have CLEARLY decided who they prefer.

Last I checked everyone gets to have a say in the general election.  Maybe Hillary would be the stronger candidate if only the dems were allowed to vote.

by matchles 2008-02-20 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Absolutely correct.

Well, a lot of the adults voted Obama.  His average margin of victory over Clinton in the last ten contests is 33%!

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-02-20 02:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Okay

MY GODS

AIN'T YOU THE BEE'S KNEES?!!

I'm swooning here...!

tough, strong, smart, proud women are SO hot!

by Seymour Glass 2008-02-20 12:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Is this a winning strategy?

http://xkcd.com/386/

by Jumbo 2008-02-20 05:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this a winning strategy?

just because posters at dkos can be (and have been) insulting doesn't mean that it's a good idea for posters here to follow suit.

by shef 2008-02-20 08:04AM | 0 recs
welcome to the internets

free speech, open comments = occasional douchebags.

You can't stop it so your best bet is to just toughen up a bit and learn to live with it. If you have a public restroom, somebody's going to inevitably draw a nasty picture and scrawl some swear words. You take the good you take the bad, you take them both and there you have: the facts of life.

by Jumbo 2008-02-20 08:40AM | 0 recs
by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 06:46AM | 0 recs
Glad you can type that list...but why...

can't any of his "supporters" identify one on their own?

I actually feel sorry for that guy.  How embarassing.

by Shazone 2008-02-20 08:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Glad you can type that list...but why...

The guy didn't go in prepared. Shit happens.

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 08:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Unprepared

Yes, poop happens. Which is exactly what will happen if a totally unprepared candidate like Obama is our nominee.

by KnowVox 2008-02-20 12:15PM | 0 recs
Why should we nominate someone losing badly,

and getting humiliated, in state after state to "a totally unprepared candidate like Obama"?

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 04:17PM | 0 recs
Quiz: Tell me one non-ceremonial bill

fully authored and passed into law by Hillary Clinton.

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 08:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Quiz: Tell me one non-ceremonial bill

S.1283 : A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a program to assist family caregivers in accessing affordable and high-quality respite care, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] (introduced 6/21/2005)      Cosponsors (28)
Committees: Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Latest Major Action: 6/21/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Note: For further action, see H.R.3248, which became Public Law 109-442 on 12/21/2006.

S.1425 : A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to reauthorize the New York City Watershed Protection Program.
Sponsor: Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] (introduced 7/17/2003)      Cosponsors (None)
Committees: Senate Environment and Public Works
Senate Reports: 108-205
Latest Major Action: 11/20/2003 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 406.
Note: For further action, see H.R.2771, which became Public Law 108-328 on 10/16/2004.

S.AMDT.69 to H.J.RES.2 To authorize the use of certain previously appropriated funds by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to be used for health examinations of emergency services personnel who responded to the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001.
Sponsor: Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] (introduced 1/21/2003)      Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/23/2003 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 69 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

S.1422 : A bill to provide for the expedited payment of certain benefits for a public safety officer who was killed or suffered a catastrophic injury as a direct and proximate result of a personal injury sustained in the line of duty in connection with the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Sponsor: Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] (introduced 9/13/2001)      Cosponsors (13)
Committees: Senate Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 9/13/2001 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Note: For further action, see H.R. 2882, which became Public Law 107-37 on 9/18/2001.

S.1622 : A bill to extend the period of availability of unemployment assistance under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act in the case of victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Sponsor: Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] (introduced 11/1/2001)      Cosponsors (2)
Committees: Senate Environment and Public Works; House Transportation and Infrastructure
Senate Reports: 107-120 House Reports: 107-377
Latest Major Action: 3/18/2002 Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 219.
Note: For further action, see H.R. 3986, which became Public Law 107-154 on 3/25/2002.

S.2496 : A bill to provide for the establishment of investigative teams to assess building performance and emergency response and evacuation procedures in the wake of any building failure that has resulted in substantial loss of life or that posed significant potential of substantial loss of life, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] (introduced 5/9/2002)      Cosponsors (3)
Committees: Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Latest Major Action: 5/9/2002 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Note: For further action, see H.R. 4687, which became Public Law 107-231 on 10/1/2002.

Your turn.

By the way, your question was bullshit, given that every list of Obama's "accomplishments" consists primarily of legislation he attached his name to as a co-sponsor.

by dhonig 2008-02-20 11:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Quiz: Tell me one non-ceremonial bill

S.J.RES.23 : A joint resolution clarifying that the use of force against Iran is not authorized by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq, any resolution previously adopted, or any other provision of law.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 11/1/2007)      Cosponsors (None)
Committees: Senate Foreign Relations
Latest Major Action: 11/1/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

S.114 : A bill to authorize resources for a grant program for local educational agencies to create innovation districts.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 1/4/2007)      Cosponsors (None)
Committees: Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Latest Major Action: 1/4/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

S.115 : A bill to suspend royalty relief, to repeal certain provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal certain tax incentives for the oil and gas industry.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 1/4/2007)      Cosponsors (None)
Committees: Senate Finance
Latest Major Action: 1/4/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.

S.116 : A bill to authorize resources to provide students with opportunities for summer learning through summer learning grants.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 1/4/2007)      Cosponsors (3)
Committees: Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Latest Major Action: 1/4/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

S.133 : A bill to promote the national security and stability of the economy of the United States by reducing the dependence of the United States on oil through the use of alternative fuels and new technology, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 1/4/2007)      Cosponsors (3)
Committees: Senate Finance
Latest Major Action: 1/4/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.

S.433 : A bill to state United States policy for Iraq, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 1/30/2007)      Cosponsors (3)
Committees: Senate Foreign Relations
Latest Major Action: 1/30/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

S.453 : A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 1/31/2007)      Cosponsors (20)
Committees: Senate Judiciary
Senate Reports: 110-191
Latest Major Action: 10/4/2007 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 411.

S.674 : A bill to require accountability and enhanced congressional oversight for personnel performing private security functions under Federal contracts, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 2/16/2007)      Cosponsors (4)
Committees: Senate Armed Services
Latest Major Action: 2/16/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.

S.692 : A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to establish a Hospital Quality Report Card Initiative to report on health care quality in Veterans Affairs hospitals.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 2/27/2007)      Cosponsors (1)
Committees: Senate Veterans' Affairs
Latest Major Action: 2/27/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

S.737 : A bill to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 in order to measure, compare, and improve the quality of voter access to polls and voter services in the administration of Federal elections in the States.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 3/1/2007)      Cosponsors (1)
Committees: Senate Rules and Administration
Latest Major Action: 3/1/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.

S.767 : A bill to increase fuel economy standards for automobiles and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 3/6/2007)      Cosponsors (6)
Committees: Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Latest Major Action: 3/6/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

These are just a partial list from '07. Do you want a comprehensive list of all the bills he's sponsered (not co-sponsered) since '05?

by dantes 2008-02-20 12:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Quiz: Tell me one non-ceremonial bill

What a joke.  Not a single one of those passed into law.  I only included bills passed into law.  I could have given you 10 times, 20 time, 30 times, as many for Clinton with your standards.  What a frickin' joke.  In other words, Nada, Squat, Diddly.  I'm laughing now.

by dhonig 2008-02-20 02:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Quiz: Tell me one non-ceremonial bill

you know legislation.  I'd love to invite you to write that up for NoQuarter -- it can be brief.  if that interests you, email me at susanunpc at gmail dot com

by susanhu 2008-02-20 03:37PM | 0 recs
I just saw you comment.

I will be responding after verifying of your claims.

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 04:18PM | 0 recs
This comment, I meant

to post in response to dhonig's predecessor comment.

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 04:19PM | 0 recs
response to come later.

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 04:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Quiz: Tell me one non-ceremonial bill

I've verified S. 1283. Credit to HRC. Recced your comment!

I will verify other bills you mentioned here as well as potential bills by w/ passed companion house legislation by Obama and willl respond thoroughly later. Please point out anything else you'd like me to explore on this front, dhonig.

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 04:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

Your tips and comments, as always, are most welcome!

And I just see that the top video is front-paged here.  Excellent.  Yes, the Obama campaign needs to prep its surrogates better.

by susanhu 2008-02-20 04:10AM | 0 recs
Thanks again, Susan...

Why can't more people see what we see? I just don't get it. Thanks again for pointing out that there isn't much here beyond the hype.

by atdleft 2008-02-20 04:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks again, Susan...

Because you mobilize people through fear and hatred. When was the last time you asked someone to vote for Hillary because of how amazing a person she is instead of how horrible a human being Obama is?

I'm an Obama supporter and I gladly concede that Clinton has a better resume. Hell, I was in for her until things got close. I was asked to change my vote because Obama was corrupt, fear of what the VRWC would do, etc.... Fear and hatred. People are tired of fear and hatred.

by crazymoloch 2008-02-20 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks again, Susan...

Do you really think that Obama will end hatred? Wasn't that his way of chipping at Clinton's African American support? Wasn't his 4 page memo painting the Clintons as racists meant to incite the hate of African American?

by HillaryKnight08 2008-02-20 12:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks again, Susan...

All the polling after Iowa, but before New Hampshire confirmed that Obama's victory had dramatically tilted black support in Obama's favor.

Here's my question to you. Outside of Obama's SC presser (who complied an idiotic list of supposed Clinton race baiting), what actual evidence can you provide showing that the Obama campaign (not it unhinged blogosphere supporters) fanned the flames of racial animus?

by crazymoloch 2008-02-20 03:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks again, Susan...

HOW DID YOU MISS THAT WHOLE BULLSHIT - THE 'CLINTONS ARE ARE RACE BAITING RACISTS" THING THAT THE OBAMACRATS PUSHED?

OUT OF THE COUNTRY THAT MONTH!?

by Seymour Glass 2008-02-20 12:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks again, Susan...

Well, that was a positively violent response. You asked why people were gravitating towards Obama, and I shared reasons why. I didn't say the reasons were fair, just that people are tired and now receptive to flighty and soaring rhetoric. Do you disagree with the reason for his appeal?

by crazymoloch 2008-02-20 03:47PM | 0 recs
IT must really suck

to be so cynical, to be so devoid of any hope.

I pity you.

by zonk 2008-02-20 04:23AM | 0 recs
No, we're not "devoid" of hope...

We just want to know WHAT we're exactly hoping for. What is it? What kind of hope is Obama bringing? What is he hoping for? And why is he having difficulty matching "hope" with action?

by atdleft 2008-02-20 04:43AM | 0 recs
Re: No, we're not "devoid" of hope...

Actually - he's got a longer list of accomplishment -- meaningful, became-law legislation than she does.

It's a campaign... HIllary has puffed up her resume - hoping no one will bother checking out her "35 years" - but Obama has better realized that elections aren't about resumes.

by zonk 2008-02-20 04:54AM | 0 recs
answers

The whole playing dumb thing is getting old, but whatever, one more time so you can never ask these inane questions again and pretend you don't know the answers.

He's hoping he can build a movement in 50 states that's big enough to give him a governing majority so he can enact a progressive agenda. He's hoping he can bring the troops home in Iraq, expand health care coverage and end our dependence on foreign oil. Step one on that action plan is the movement building thing and that's coming along quite nicely if you haven't noticed.

by Jumbo 2008-02-20 04:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Hoping for Answers

Hoping to build a 50 state . . ..
Hoping to get some answers.
Hoping he will be able to move Senators and Members.

Obama Hopes he has what it takes to be president, and so do I because it appears there is a significant chance that he will be the nominee.  But until he is, there is still more I can do to make sure the Democrats nominate someone regarding whom there is evidence that she has those skill; not just hope.

by mdFriendofHillary 2008-02-20 06:24AM | 0 recs
Skills?

If she's so damn skilled and effective, why does she keep losing? Why can't she skillfully run a successful presidential campaign?

by Jumbo 2008-02-20 08:00AM | 0 recs
Buster?

Who's buster? I think you may have me confused with someone else.

by Jumbo 2008-02-20 07:58AM | 0 recs
Re: answers

The Clintons and the DLC and the Democratic hawks and the NAFTA people and the 50+1 percenters have a completely proven record of failure.  Millions of jobs gone forever.  Who knows how many killed in Iraq?  We need a new beginning, and Obama is that man.  He has run a near flawless campaign, attracted a MILLION individual donors and can give a hell of a speech, unlike Hillary, who can really spray a room with ether.  Let's turn the page.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-02-20 02:15PM | 0 recs
IT must really suck

to {have a two digit IQ}, to be so devoid of any {Brains}.

I pity you.

{don't feel too bad, half the world and at least 3/4s of obamacrats are right there with ya...it's that ol' bell curve thingee}

by Seymour Glass 2008-02-20 12:28PM | 0 recs
Disillusionment...

Only those who are under some sort of illusions.  Most of us aren't.  

And by the way, there have been repeated discussions of Obama's accomplishments, plans, and platforms.  The attacks on those things are mostly without substance.  The fact that you can find some people out there that are clueless, un-prepped, or uh... less than quick on their feet means very little as far as the candidate themselves.  

It's not hard to find people like that.  Hannity and Limbaugh both frequently play this kind of 'gotcha' game with Democrats, and have for years.  

It's bad enough you now have somewhat more respectable journalists like Matthews playing it, but we now have Democrats cheering them on?  When did this become a good kind of journalism?

by Brillobreaks 2008-02-20 04:29AM | 0 recs
Re: respectable journalist?
Chris Matthews a respectable journalist? You obviously haven't watched his shows or been to Media Matters: http://mediamatters.org/about_us/
On their frontpage today is an article about Matthews displaying a picture of Osama Bin Laden while talking about Obama.
by ricardo4 2008-02-20 04:43AM | 0 recs
Re: respectable journalist?

Hey, I said somewhat respectable...  :D

Seriously though, for all his problems he's really nowhere near as bad as the two I was comparing him to.

by Brillobreaks 2008-02-20 04:55AM | 0 recs
Re: what has surprised me
Thanks for the diary. What has surprised me is that Barack Obama and his supporters like to point out his ability to
bring us all together.
But Sen. Clinton has had the proven legislative history of bills that have been CoSponsored by Republicans like Norm Coleman, Sen. Specter and Sen. Snowe such as  
S.211 : A bill to facilitate nationwide availability of 2-1-1 telephone service for information and referral on human services, volunteer services, and for other purposes.
from Thomas
I remember in 2000 when Bush's supporters talked about how he
reached across the aisle
in Texas. For me actions speak louder than words.
by ricardo4 2008-02-20 04:39AM | 0 recs
Re: OK, I'll bite

Kids & Cars Safety Act Passes Congress

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/20/4292 7/7374

by JoeySky18 2008-02-20 04:53AM | 0 recs
Re: what has surprised me

1st of all, bringing Senators together is not the same as bringing people together. If the Senate elected the President, Hillary would be our nominee already, but things don't work like that in America.

2nd George W. Bush actually did work across the aisle in Texas. Just like Hillary Clinton does in Washington. It wasn't a lie. George W. Bush just happens to also be an evil and stupid little man. I don't think either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama are evil or stupid. I think they're both smart and compassionate people who would both make excellent presidents. What do you think?

by Jumbo 2008-02-20 05:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Bush and Texas
Actually a close read of Texas Political History shows that many Texas Democrats became Republicans or Independents during that time period so Bush didn't have to reach very far. It was a slogan made up by Rove.
For me the jury is out on whether Obama would make an excellent president, since you asked my opinion. I have nothing against him, except his lack of experience. And that for me is enough.
by ricardo4 2008-02-20 09:50AM | 0 recs
Re: OK, I'll bite response

sorry slipped and replied to diary see downstream. Thanks Also feel free to list Obama's legislative accomplishments.

by ricardo4 2008-02-20 05:08AM | 0 recs
Re: what has surprised me

Well, for one, Obama/Lugar on nonproliferation. To quote a 2006 article on Obama's first year in the Senate:
"But I do follow legislation, at least on some issues, and I have been surprised by how often Senator Obama turns up, sponsoring or co-sponsoring really good legislation on some topic that isn't wildly sexy, but does matter. His bills tend to have the following features: they are good and thoughtful bills that try to solve real problems; they are in general not terribly flashy; and they tend to focus on achieving solutions acceptable to all concerned, not by compromising on principle, but by genuinely trying to craft a solution that everyone can get behind.

His legislation is often proposed with Republican co-sponsorship, which brings me to another point: he is bipartisan in a good way. According to me, bad bipartisanship is the kind practiced by Joe Lieberman. Bad bipartisans are so eager to establish credentials for moderation and reasonableness that they go out of their way to criticize their (supposed) ideological allies and praise their (supposed) opponents. They also compromise on principle, and when their opponents don't reciprocate, they compromise some more, until over time their positions become indistinguishable from those on the other side.

This isn't what Obama does. Obama tries to find people, both Democrats and Republicans, who actually care about a particular issue enough to try to get the policy right, and then he works with them. This does not involve compromising on principle. It does, however, involve preferring getting legislation passed to having a spectacular battle. (This is especially true when one is in the minority party, especially in this Senate: the chances that Obama's bills will actually become law increase dramatically when he has Republican co-sponsors.)"

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_ wings/2006/10/barack_obama.html

by tomchaps 2008-02-20 10:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

In November, the American will get a white male to be their president again.

They have maliciously attack their best candidate based on God knows all the silly reasons they can think of ignoring her credential and accomplishment.

They have lift the most charismatic candidate with inspiring copy&paste speech of hope and change, ignoring his lack of credential and accomplishment.

When the dust is all over, Republican will win the election again. Americans get what they deserve.

by JoeySky18 2008-02-20 04:52AM | 0 recs
Nice

I find this more of the classic "Blame America" first tactic than Michelle's comments.

Got it - not Hillary's fault that she lost.  Not due to poor campaign organization and resource allocation.  Not due to Obama succeeding after months of being a huge underdog.

Its Americans who dont vote for Hillary (those that dont count) - its their fault.

Cute.

by BWasikIUgrad 2008-02-20 08:10AM | 0 recs
Re: What's amazing, of course, is that

Being the First Lady isn't just being the president's wife.  Hillary certainly was more than just that.  Dismissing it as not being experience worth counting is just wrong, nevermind sexist.

As far as their legislative experience goes, if you want to include Obama's state senate experience, I actually think he has a much better record.  

Nationally though, neither has really accomplished much as legislators... but then again, neither has the congress as a whole.  Between bush and the republicans, not much has gotten done there for a long time now aside from the yearly pork bill and 'supporting our troops'.

by Brillobreaks 2008-02-20 05:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton's record

I will try to do a diary on it soon..but here is a quick example.

177 bills sponsored in the 109th session of the Senate you can find them through thomas here:
http://clinton.senate.gov/senate/legisla tion/

from Hillary's website www.hillaryclinton.com:

Hillary passed legislation to track the health status of our troops so that conditions like Gulf War Syndrome would no longer be misdiagnosed. She is an original sponsor of legislation that expanded health benefits to members of the National Guard and Reserves and has been a strong critic of the Administration's handling of Iraq.

and

She has introduced legislation to tie Congressional salary increases to an increase in the minimum wage

also
Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, and her legislation to help schools address environmental hazards. She has also proposed expanding access to child care.

Her work on SCHIP and other children's health legislation has been well documented.

by ricardo4 2008-02-20 05:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

He can read teleprompter like heck on fire.

by Beltway Dem 2008-02-20 05:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

Did you see his speech last night? No teleprompter, lots of details...

Personally, I prefer Clinton's more wonkish style, but there's no need to be unfair.

by tomchaps 2008-02-20 08:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

obama was a failure as a legislator. he doesn't understand how the system works. the reason people can't remember what he accomplished is because he can't work the system to get what he wants accomplished.

by campskunk 2008-02-20 06:00AM | 0 recs
Lie

"obama was a failure as a legislator."

That's a lie.

Please see here: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/20/1132 7/6329

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 06:44AM | 0 recs
Ummm... Not exactly...

OK, so Obama wrote one bill on lobbying reform and one bill recognizing the situation in the Congo. That's good... But what's Obama been doing on Iraq? What's he been doing on energy? What about the economy? If he wants to show he's a real leader, Obama needs to show more leadership NOW.

by atdleft 2008-02-20 07:18AM | 0 recs
Why did Hillary enable the war?

by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 07:31AM | 0 recs
Response posted here:
Obama's Record Reference: Version 1
by NeuvoLiberal, Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 12:32:07 PM EDT
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/20/1132 7/6329
by NeuvoLiberal 2008-02-20 06:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Response posted here:

I see that you are being ignored. Hmmm ... I wonder why.

Great list by the way. Thanks! I did not know about all that stuff.

by Freedom 2008-02-20 08:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

Great diary. It cracks me up how Obama supporters talk about his goal is to bring us all together and build a progressive majority and enact progressive agenda...when his strategy of Hillary hate is actually tearing us apart. He may bring repugs and independents and some dems together, but he's losing many dems.

Plus, his economic plans are not progressive...they're retyped Ron Paul plans -- no taxes, no monies to bolster unemployment, social security, less government regulation. Scares this progressive.

by seattlegonz 2008-02-20 07:05AM | 0 recs
TIRED of the lying

This is why the HRC campaign imploded.

You engaged in unfair, dishonest tactics.  So some moron froze up on TV.

Obama has hundreds of accomplishments.  He sponsored over 800 bills in Illinois, many of the bills he sponsored in the US Senate became law.

Yet you lie.

Here's the bottom line.

BOTH Obama and Hillary have legislative accomplishments.  MOST of the time they supported each other's bills.

See why Obama is winning?  I can be HONEST about your candidate.  People are tired of this BS.

by bigdavefromqueens 2008-02-20 08:09AM | 0 recs
Re: What does it take to sponsor a law?

Political capital.  Got any to spare?

by Dave 2008-02-20 12:16PM | 0 recs
On psychobabble ...

The diarist on Obama: My gut take on Obama, from watching him a lot and observing him closely:  He is all about the win.  He eats up the crowd fervor.  He gets off on it.  It makes him feel powerful and omnipotent.

To watch this president connect with people emotionally is an awesome thing. It's a raw, needy, palpable, electrifying thing that happens ... It's as if he's soaking up the people like he's soaking up the sun, with the warmth pouring deep and direct into his political soul and recharging him, refilling him somehow once again with his own humanity and some sense of his role in the destiny of his country." [A "journalistic worshipper" on Bill Clinton ... as reported by paranoid 'libertarian' Edith Efron.]

by Freedom 2008-02-20 08:18AM | 0 recs
Re: On psychobabble ...

Well, now, they both love the adoration.

But, Hillary is a very different kind of person, and SHE is the one running, NOT Bill.

by splashy 2008-02-20 09:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

What exactly is your point?  That Obama's support relies on a pool of uninformed voters?  

That's bullshit, and we both know it.  That's simply the narrative this week. Why don't you hear Clinton supporters interrogated on her accomplishments?  Simply because she's supposed to be so knowledgeable and therefore her support base must be. It's illogical.

If you want I can sit here and rattle off all of his senate accomplishments.  Or for the sake of ease, I could link them.  Unfortunately whats-his-name from TX didn't have that luxury.  

by Tenafly Viper 2008-02-20 08:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

oh for fark's sake, SusanHu, give it a rest:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_ wings/2006/10/barack_obama.html
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editori al_opinion/oped/articles/2006/02/08/salv aging_the_auto_industry/
http://obama.senate.gov/press/050914-oba ma_coburn_to_1/index.php
http://obama.senate.gov/press/060202-oba ma_to_propos/index.php
http://hill6.thehill.com/the-executive/o bama-and-coburn-revive-effort-to-stop-no -bid-fema-contracts-2006-09-14.html
http://www.examiner.com/a-293236%7EEdito rial__Spending_database_bill_marks_new_e ra.html
http://www.grist.org/news/muck/2006/07/2 6/fuel-econ/
http://illinoischannel.spaces.live.com/b log/cns!B0DB128F5CD96151!1698.entry
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?op tion=com_content&task=view&id=43 4&Itemid=86
http://obama.senate.gov/press/060216-sen ator_obamas_1/index.php

it's really too bad though that we aren't connected to an international telecommunications network with easily-usable search programs - "search engines", if you will - that allow regular voters to look up THE FACTS for themselves.

honestly, this whole "list your achievements" thing is, to use an ironically apt term, a pissing contest.

and Hillary's no winner, voting AGAINST a landmine bill, losing the initial healthcare fight because of closed negotiations and a my-way-or-the-highway approach, and utterly self-destructing in a primary campaign which was SUPPOSED TO BE INEVITABLE for her from the start.

SusanHu, you've proven at least as bad as Taylor Marsh in perpetuating mistruths and outright lies about Obama.  lying is not how you win elections, and it's CERTAINLY not the right thing to do for the U.S.

by fightinfilipino 2008-02-20 09:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Where's the pork(y)

Remember when Hillary first became a Senator, and everyone was just itching to see what a headline-obsessed, know-it-all prima donna she was going to be? Yep, and she did what she did best--put her head down, worked hard for her constituents, minded the details, and won over not only skeptical New Yorkers, but many of her hostile Senate colleagues. Obama faced some of the same scrutiny (not as much, of course, since he didn't have the intense Hillary-hatred looming).

To quote from a 2006 article on Obama's first year as a Senator:
"Besides, consider how many Senators must have been watching for any hint of self-importance when Obama arrived in the Senate, given the press he had coming in; how many of them would have had to have been waiting for any sign that he was thinking: here am I, the wondrous Barack Obama, ready to set the Senate straight! The fact that he seems to have disarmed most of them is, I think, an achievement in its own right; it would have been impossible had he introduced his own comprehensive anti-poverty program, or something."

Instead, he worked on smaller, wonkier issues. The article continues:
"But I do follow legislation, at least on some issues, and I have been surprised by how often Senator Obama turns up, sponsoring or co-sponsoring really good legislation on some topic that isn't wildly sexy, but does matter. His bills tend to have the following features: they are good and thoughtful bills that try to solve real problems; they are in general not terribly flashy; and they tend to focus on achieving solutions acceptable to all concerned, not by compromising on principle, but by genuinely trying to craft a solution that everyone can get behind."

He lists some of them here:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_ wings/2006/10/barack_obama.html

And I'm sure you've seen it, but his record in Illinois is summarized in a NYT graphic here:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/0 7/29/us/politics/20070730_OBAMA_GRAPHIC. html

by tomchaps 2008-02-20 09:14AM | 0 recs
OMG that guy in the video update...

is brilliant.

Let's buy time and put it on TV all over this country!

by Shazone 2008-02-20 09:48AM | 0 recs
Re: OMG that guy in the video update...

please do.

we can show the rest of the nation that Clinton's campaign really is full of assholes.

by fightinfilipino 2008-02-20 10:06AM | 0 recs
And Obama's campaign as represented by you...

is not?

by Shazone 2008-02-20 11:26AM | 0 recs
Re: OMG that guy in the video update...

Getting testy? How many times Obama, you and your fellow dividers lied about Hillary in last 10 months?

Keep counting!!

by Sandeep 2008-02-20 02:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications?

yeah, i know what a "friend of labor" obama is. he trashed my union as a "special interest" in iowa.

by campskunk 2008-02-20 10:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

I think this is the one, Susan! This is the piece of information that will finally turn everything around for Clinton!

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-20 10:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

They can play it along side the tapes of Wal-Mart board of directors meetings attended by board member Hillary who remains silent as unions are referred to as "blood sucking parasites". Hillary was a member of the Wal-Mart board for six years.

During the same time period as Wal-Mart was conducting its anti-union campaign, Mrs. Clinton was recorded telling stockholders "I'm always proud of Wal-Mart and what we do and the way we do it better than anybody else".

by hankg 2008-02-20 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

You're bad, Bob.  Very very bad.

by Dave 2008-02-20 12:15PM | 0 recs
This is Amazing stuff!!!

Why can't that dope Mark Penn put this stuff in play instead of pushing the laughable "DayOne" crap.

by demwords 2008-02-20 10:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications? (Part Deux)

Great post! Thanks a million.

I agree he actually gets off on the adoration -- he deserves it. It makes him proud to be an American.

His plans, the ones he doesn't talk about, are frighteningly right wing. He's Bush in a liberal jacket.

by seattlegonz 2008-02-20 10:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Susan has my recommendation!!!!

Susan,

I think your research and writing skill are top notch!

You can use me as a reference when you apply for that job as a White House staffer in the Obama Administration.

by mikelewis68 2008-02-20 12:02PM | 0 recs
Re: What's amazing, of course, is that

I know you love Hillary, Deanno, but your referrence to Obama in the like manner was completely unneccessary.

by HillaryKnight08 2008-02-20 12:17PM | 0 recs
Saint Barack

What we have to deal with every day.  Disrespect.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-02-20 02:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications?

Yet the Chicago Tribune endorses this guy after Rezko and this Maytag story. What a crock. This reminds me so much of Bush in 2000; the press wants Obama and that is why the masses go along. No experience in 2000 = incompetence in 2008 and beyond.

by India 2008-02-20 12:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications?

A MUST READ, India.

by Freedom 2008-02-20 03:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Can They List His Qualifications?

A DailyKos diary?  

by newhorizon 2008-02-20 07:41PM | 0 recs
Reagan Democrats will vote for McCain

In the words of Messiah, we should reach across the aisle!!

I am reaching across the aisle and voting for McCain!!

See how "hopeful" I am:-)

by Sandeep 2008-02-20 02:18PM | 0 recs
Obama supporters are quite informed

Check out this diary I found over at Daily kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/20/ 201332/807/36/458633

I encouraged the diarist to repost this over here, but I haven't seen it appear yet.  It's really informative and wonk-ish.

by Tenafly Viper 2008-02-20 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: That diary is idiotic

Actually there was a fair amount of (granted, amateur) analysis involved.  It certainly is beneficial to look at the legislative accomplishments side by side and to know who co-sponsored each candidates' bills.

You claim the diary was idiotic and that no original work was accomplished.  That's an unfair critique for two reasons:

  1. This very diary, in which you are making your comments, is a construction of nothing but copy and pasted fragments.
  2. You didn't bother to counter with any relevent arguments.  You simply gave the typical elitist response that we laymen couldn't possibly understand the complexities of a senate bill.  Typical DLC automatic response.  

Clearly you're lashing out because the diarist didn't support your (ahem) position.  

by Tenafly Viper 2008-02-20 09:35PM | 0 recs
If sponsored Bills passing was the criteria

we'd still be looking at Joe Biden. Of course, plenty of his enacted proposals are real stinkers (RAVE Act.)

by benmasel 2008-02-20 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: If sponsored Bills passing was the criteria

Not exactly sure what that was a response to. No one deserves to be compared with Joe Biden with respect to his domestic agenda.

by bowiegeek 2008-02-20 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: It's very obvious...

Isn't that just scary to think that George W Bush was more qualified to be president when he first ran than Obama??

I think we're following up one minimally qualified feel-good candidate with another.

by newhorizon 2008-02-20 07:39PM | 0 recs
Having FACTS is not everything, NOT having them IS

Instead of falling victim to partisan politics as well as divisive inter-party AND BLOGOSPHERE tactics, how about we just don't listen to Obama, Clinton, or anyone else that is representing them in any way? Why don't we just use a factual, unbiased source like the UNITED STATES LIBRARY OF CONGRESS to get our facts about who has actually done what for our country and it's people such as this responsible American mom did in order to make an intelligent decision and who wrote this diary entitled "I Refuse to Buy into the Obama Hype"? Again, FORGET where this was originally posted and respect the unbiased FACTS provided by a skeptic so that we can move forward TOGETHER!  - http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/20/ 201332/807/36/458633#c276

by VT COnQuest 2008-02-21 12:37AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads