<p>What</a> we don't know about Obama - Yahoo! News.</p>
<p>article there^</p>
<p>I find it funny that the media waited till after he was elected to start writing about his inconsistencies and asking questions about who he really is.</p>
<p>Huh? How dare anyone question the Messiah's infallibility!? You must be part of a vast right wing conspiracy.</p>
<p>^LOL...too funny</p>
<p>"The One" is both omniscient and omnipotent. Praise Him! :)</p>
<p>Obama is hot stuff.</p>
<p>I would traverse the most perilous seas and highest mountains to kiss the ground he walks on. FACT.</p>
<p>i wish i were his derivative, so i could lie tangent to his curves</p>
<p>That article doesn't really expose anything about Obama. It asks questions that couldn't possibly be known during the campaign and is basically just laying out stances that firm decisions will determine.</p>
<p>If anything, I've found Obama even more impressive as a President-Elect and President than as a candidate. If he would have campaigned from the centrist position that he seems to be governing, I'll bet he would have won by 10 points.</p>
<p>If you pay attention, the old "media bias" argument is a tried-and-true vote getter for conservatives, whether it's accurate or not. The McCain campaign kept Palin under wraps, admitting later that they knew she wasn't intellectually ready for the big time, and then had an orchestrated message of "media bias" and "discrimination" when people questioned her readiness. Obama was brutally investigated for Rev. Wright and many of his slip-ups throughout the campaign. In the end, though, he provided reasonable responses and now seems to be proving himself to have a grasp of constitutional law (UChicago professor) and a wisdom to know how to apply it.</p>
<p>He's not the messiah, but could be a strong president. Give him a chance to screw up first.</p>
<p>All Hail, Lord Obama!</p>
<p>About the only thing the conservative right knows these days is "what we don't know." The party is in real danger of giving it up to ignorant tactics and a "Joe the Plumber" image. Bill Buckley must be turning in his grave.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Bill Buckley must be turning in his grave.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The Republican party, busy trying to shove their morality down everyone's throat, is a disgrace to all right-leaning individuals.</p>
<p>I posted this in another thread. I'm sure no one in the media dared bring this up during the campaign. It's a quote from his memoir Dreams of My Father. IMHO, it's probably not indicative of someone classified as post-racial, an individual who transcends race, and a person who will bridge the gaps of intolerance.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The emotions between the races could never be pure; even love was tarnished by the desire to find in the other some element that was missing in ourselves. Whether we sought out our demons or salvation, the other race would always remain just that: menacing, alien, and apart.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>@ dontno - sounds like you're reading that quote out of context - go back and read the whole page, not just 2 sentences. Based on previous knowledge of his views and tone of the passage, it sounds like he's playing devil's advocate, explaining something hypocritical about humanity, that no matter what, our views are always clouded by some degree of prejudice. </p>
<p>Use common sense. Even if you absolutely HATE and UTTERLY DESPISE Obama, you must admit he's not extremely stupid and wouldn't say one thing in his speeches and something completely different in his best-selling book which millions - people of all races, classes, political views, fans and critics - have read and would have picked up on. Otherwise, this would have been torn to shreds by now...hundreds of people dedicated most of the last few years finding dirt on him, this would have been obvious in the extreme.</p>
<p>
[quote]
it sounds like he's playing devil's advocate, explaining something hypocritical about humanity, that no matter what, our views are always clouded by some degree of prejudice.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I like your analysis of the quote. I appreciate a reasoned response rather than baseless accusations of racism. I'm not a fan of Obama (too much of a leftist), but I think he's extremely intelligent and charismatic. The book he wrote has been almost entirely ignored by the liberally biased media. He had written that book prior to beginning a political (at least a nationally important one) career and thus the candor is apparent. </p>
<p>Almost everyone wants to focus on The Audacity of Hope, which by the way was one of Dr. Rev "God Damn America"'s sermons in 1988. It contains the line: "white people's greed creates a world in need." What a surprise that no one picked up on that.</p>
<p>
[quote]
he's not extremely stupid and wouldn't say one thing in his speeches and something completely different in his best-selling book which millions
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's the problem with Obama. He's crafted and framed his story into the perfect underdog tale. Obama's an extremely intelligent man and he knows how people view him and what traits will be attributed to him. Obama's memoir paints a much different picture of the man that what you'll hear in his speeches. Here's a great example. </p>
<p>In his famous speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, he painted his parent's love story as uniquely American. His father left Kenya for "a magical place, called America." His white mother raised in the paragon of traditional America, Kansas. Their love, an "improbable love", could only occur in this great country.</p>
<p>The truth: His father was already married when he engaged in a bigamist marriage with his then 17 year old mother. His father got his master's from Harvard, then immediately returned to Kenya where he was part of strong opposition to any pro-capitalistic/American intervention, ultimately siding with the Soviet socialists in a political dispute. His mother spent almost her entire adult life in Third World countries and had an affinity for foreign men (second husband was Indonesian). She even once refused to meet American businessmen in Indonesia (summarized in Obama's book), remarking: "They're not my people."</p>
<p>So that's but one example of the convenient story Obama has created. There's many more, yet the press has largely completely ignored his book.</p>
<p>But back to the quote. Here's the context: Obama was in his early 20's and came to the realization that his mother had a strong attraction to dark skinned men. He found this notion very unnerving and made that comment. Was it antagonistic? I'm unsure, but I know it doesn't speak of tolerance. A man who said that isn't likely to bond the races, to be the great uniter. If his view of racial relations is so despondent, so negative, so defeatist, then why is considered a great uniting racial force?</p>
<p>@ Sir MIx-A-Lot:</p>
<p>
[quote]
All I know is that 8 years of Republican rule = FAILURE
[/quote]
</p>
<p>George Bush is a dolt. He's not a real conservative. He's a conservative on the sole basis of his religious views, nothing else. He advocates **big government<a href="faith%20based%20initiatives,%20no%20child%20left%20behind,%20etc...">/B</a>. Democrats should have loved Bush because he pushed the same policies that they would have.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Jeremiah Wright Follower
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The other smears you say were absurd. But I think this is undeniable. Wright married him and Michelle and baptized his two children. He attended Wright's church for 20 years, choosing it amongst over 10 other black churches he worked with as a community organizer. (In his book, he details lengthy conversations he had with Wright about various political topics, mainly involving the black community.) Finally, Obama named his second book, published in 2004, after one of Wright's sermons from 1988. I imagine that made an impression on him.</p>
<p>@ molly: </p>
<p>Regarding the notion that the media would have uncovered the oddities and inconsistencies of Obama's life. Here's a quote from a journalist:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Reporters who have covered Obama’s biography or his problems with certain voter blocs have been challenged the most aggressively. “Theyʹre terrified of people poking around Obama’s life,” one reporter says. “The whole Obama narrative is built around this narrative that Obama and David Axelrod built, and, like all stories, it’s not entirely true. So they have to be protective of the crown jewels.” Another reporter notes that, during the last year, Obama’s old friends and Harvard classmates were requested not to talk to the press without
permission.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Quotes from " a journalist", " one reporter" or "another reporter" don't cut it, Dontno, but I sense you know that. Who wrote it and where was it published? If it wasn't written, quintuple hearsay doesn't cut it either. Some very powerful interests would have loved to see Obama crash and burn, and the source of damaging hearsay would have been indentified and the story would have seen the light of day. Shadow stories and sourceless rumors are not the way old-school conservatives would have done it. They would have stood up and defended their policy preferences with something other than bombast and used sources who would also stand up to defend themselves. Buckley set the bar, and most republicans have been simply running under it for years. </p>
<p>I'm certainly not a conservative, and I'm delighted Obama won, but I do think it is critical that an aggressive, articulate and informed conservative voice be heard these days. Politics being what it is, the majority view should be constantly questioned and challenged. If the Republican party hopes to revive itself, it must abandon the "Joe-the-Plumber" courtship. Even Limbaugh is hurting the party in the long run, IMO.</p>
<p>During the campaign I found that trying to have an intelligent balanced conversation about the pros and cons of Obama was met with the knee-jerk hostility verging on violence exhibited herein. </p>
<p>The cherished tenet of respecting diversity should probably be extended by Liberal Democratics respecting diversity of though and allowing thoughtful questions.</p>
<p>Knee-jerk responses are common to "liberal" supporters too, no question. We all have to raise the level of debate, or we're too vulnerable to manipulation by all groups seeking power.</p>
<p>No one is perfect, but I think America is willing to pretend that Obama is.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No one is perfect, but I think America is willing to pretend that Obama is.
[/quote]
What the heck election did you watch? Only slightly more than half the country voted for him. Almost half the country voted against him. No intelligent person could possibly believe him to be perfect, although of course much of his fanbase consists of diehard supporters unwilling to admit their messiah has a flaw...good thing there are plenty of rational, logical supporters as well.
Same is true for the other side as well. I've heard intelligent Republicans/Libertarians make strong arguments against him, and Socialists attempt to degrade him (sorry, have yet to meet an intelligent socialist...). But I've also heard arguments along the lines of, "Well, he's a negro, he's a Muslim, and he's a terrorist" (apparently, a terrorist is someone who opposes war?).</p>
<p>@dontno - you made some very good points, although "requesting" someone not talk about your personal life makes no difference, Harvard/Columbia are hardly small colleges, and Obama has hundreds of college acquaintances who are intelligent and vocal. It is true that most don't know the details of Obama's personal life, or his father's. Others pretend he was raised dirt-poor in a log cabin and taught himself to read...(ok, exaggerating, but you wouldn't believe some things people believe!) I personally don't care about his father, or mother, or Revered, or the man who cuts his hair or his personal chef...they're not the ones sitting in the Oval office determining his economic strategies.</p>