Perhaps it's just the cynic in me, but I don't believe that someone can rise all the way to the White House and still be an honest person. Searching for honesty in a President will be about as fruitful as searching for the Fountain of Youth.

__________________
Carolina Politics Online

Sam

Werd. But my point was honesty trumps all.

__________________
"Good intentions are a noble thing, but you have to look at the end result to see if those intentions are well placed."
-- LessGovMrPrez

"I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have."
-- Thomas Jefferson

everyone should search what barack obama has voted for while he was in the senate. his vote against hapius corpius in Gautanamo Bay and votes funding the iraq war despite what his speaches are about is revealing.

he isn't as honest as he tries to make himself seem but except for maybe Ron Paul and some of the democratic candidates who seem to be eliminated he seems to be the most honest. (thats just my impression)

France is not America my friend.

Pointing out that Blair is out of power in England or any of the other more progressive changes in other countries wouldn't make my point any better than France does yours. Oh, and just as a sidebar how many hundreds of thousands of troops and trillions of dollars does FRANCE have tied down in IRAQ? See what I mean... it's different.

Americans are sick to the gills with George Bush (that translates Republican) and 70% or more want the troops home and the money drain to stop and the economy is souring.

The Republican candidates are lack luster at best. And history shows that even if all was good three terms in a row for President by either Party is a tough nut to crack.

Then you have Obama with the Oprah effect and numbers like 239,000 Democratic, Independent, New Voters & even Republican caucus goers in Iowa this time (twice as many as last time) and it is on!

Watch and you can just feel the excitement for CHANGE!!!

France doesn't have to be America. You are missing my point. Jacques Chirac was very unpopular at the end of his term and people were clamoring for change in France as well. Sarkozy is a member of the same party as Chirac and yet he still won the election. People voted for him because they viewed him as the anti-Chirac. His party affiliation wasn't enough to matter.

Yes, I have watched Obama on tv many times and yes he is a very good speaker, but that doesn't equate to substance, as I have already pointed out. He lacks a record of accomplishments in his government service and the details of his plans are very vague.

He may very well become President, but he may not even end up being the nominee. I don't think Hillary will throw in the towel until at least the day after Super Tuesday.

The Democrats should not at all think this election is going to be a slam dunk because the moment they are positive they can't lose will be the moment they do.

__________________
Carolina Politics Online

Sam

What I meant when I said "take what you can get" is that I'd rather have Obama, despite his lack of experience, in the White House than someone who may know how to run a company or a state, but who does not have the energy and ability to connect with the country.

Hillary would be terribly divisive. The GOPers, they all continue to support the Iraq War, a very unpopular war. So the mood of the country isn't going to change with a GOP president who still supports a war most Americans despise.

So my point was this: Obama may not have the most experience under his belt, but he knows how to connect with America. He knows how to make people excited about this country and our future again.

We need that desperately. One of Bush's biggest problems is that he's not tuned in to the population. He doesn't seem to care what we think about anything. He just does what he thinks is right, no matter what the consequences, which is a mentality that could come with all that experience as governor.

People who have run a state or a city or a company, and have had success, think they know how to do things. They already think they know best. But at the end of the day, the president of the United States is just one man (or woman.)

And if that person's views or ideas don't mesh with the public, we have problems.

So someone like Obama comes in without a whole lot of experience, but is able to connect with the public and will at least try to shape the country in the image the American people want it shaped.

So if I have to "settle" for a president with limited experience because I think he can be a good leader for America, then I'll take that.

Sure, I'd like someone with Obama's passion and excitement, but also with Biden's or Richardon's or Clinton's experience, but that candidate is not around.

So I'll take what I can get.

I'd rather have some who can motivate this country again than one of those "my way or the highway" politicians.

__________________
Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it. ---- Mark Twain

Well, that didn't seem to bother anyone in the last two elections...

And where has the political atmosphere gone in those years? In the crapper. These "experienced" people are what put us in the current situation. The definition of insanity is to continue doing the same thing over and over and over and keep expecting different results.

That's an incredibly disingenious straw man argument. Hitler was an incredible leader. The problem is that he was also a madman that lead people to do unspeakable things. But he also has zero relationship to the subject at hand and your statement is just a misdirectional tool to try to compare Obama to a monster.

I have watched politics for many years. Of all of the candidates I have seen, some have IT and some don't. JFK had IT. Reagan had IT. Obama has IT. IT being those intangibles...those things that can inspire a lot of people to do great things. That can finally get people to work together for the good of the country instead of the good of the respective parties. That can get people out of their self-centered world view to realize that as Americans we each owe the other the sum of the greater good. Without each other, there is no America. So we damned well better start acting like it. Obama is the only candidate I have seen this cycle that can inspire that attitude, because he believes it himself. Most of the legislation he has sponsored or co-sponsored has been in cooperation with the other side of the aisle.

Don't discount the ability to inspire to great things. Kennedy inpsired a country to go to the moon. Look at the enormous amount of technological advances we have as a result of that effort. Reagan inspired a country to bootstrap itself out of a malaise that threatened to send a fragile economy into a tailspin. And he did it with words and a few judicious actions. I see some of the same qualities in Obama that I have seen in JFK and Reagan.

2-sided coin, my friend. You assume it will be worse with no evidence to back that up. And I would challenge you to name one thing that A. Lincoln did as a US Representative.

But since you asked:

From Wiki...

Obama has a degree in foreign relations. He has sat on the foreign relations committee with Joe Biden, Dick Lugar, Chuck Hagel, Chris Dodd, John Sununu and others. You can earn a PhD in foreign relations in the time he has been on that committee and not get 1/10 of 1% of the knowledge he has gotten from the experience. In addition, the President's role in foreign relations is much less than you might believe. Certainly the ceremonial state affairs, but the nuts and bolts of it come from the State Dept. at the President's request. They are the ones that do the real work; the negotiations, the talks. The President determines the goals and directions. The State Dept. makes it happen. When you see world leaders sitting down to discuss matters "of mutual interest," the talks are usually as scripted as a Broadway musical right down to where the water pitcher is sitting. The script, of course, was hammered out weeks in advance by the deputies of the respective leaders. As long as a President has AND LISTENS TO a good Secretary of State **COUGH**Colin Powell**COUGH**, there isn't a whole lot of damage he can do.

Since I assume you voted for Bush in the last 2 elections, does that mean that you are among the "lot of people...who are so easily sucked in" since we ended up with VERY sub-par people running the government for the last 8 years?

I submit that we have a capitol full of sub-par people running the government and that Obama is a radical change from that idiocy.

You seem to think that only career politicians can be effective legislators and leaders. But that is 180 degrees from what the founding fathers wanted. They wanted people with everyday, real-world experiences to run the country for a term of office, and then go back to their lives with the knowledge that the laws they enacted would have an effect on their lives after office.

I don't understand the need to bash someone because they have the audacity to challenge us to see the greatness that is possible from and in this country. I don't understand the need to belittle someone and compare them to Hitler because they have the cojones to challenge a country to chart a different course from the current one that has a giant segment of the population disillusioned and disenfranchised. And I certainly can't see the logic in demanding change from the same "experienced" people that put us in this situation in the first place.

__________________
Tax & Spend > Borrow & Spend

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

Every feeling you've ever felt can be found in the works of Beethoven, Bruckner, Mahler, and Wagner.

Amen to prrriide.... I agree with every word 100 percent.

Very well said.

__________________
Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it. ---- Mark Twain

I may be crossing the line here, but there's one thing that everbody has avoided talking about in this primary. That is race, I know it bothers me to think this.but lets talk reality for a moment.
If Obama wins the primary the Democatic party will lose votes in the south.
I don't like it ,but in my opinion this will become an issue in the presidental election.
I marched for civil rights in the 60's, but raceism still exist in America and not just in White supremecy groups.
In 2004 I was in Georgia I heard more than one person say they wouln't vote for Kerry because of the way he looked.
Now I may be wrong fact is I hope I am.
Cause although I always supported Edwards Obama does have some good ideas on bringing America back together again.

I sort of agree that race may end up playing a factor in the general election.

But on the other hand, we're going to have to break through the color barrier at some point. Barack Obama seems like the perfect African American leader to do just that right now.

I don't think the Democratic party should be afraid to nominate a black man for president. I think it shows how far we've come in America that a black man and a woman are finally getting a fair shake.

And if Obama was to lose the general because of race, then maybe this country isn't worthy of a leader with such vision and hope for America.

I want the Dems to win the general as much as the next guy, but I'm not afraid to get behind an African-American as my candidate. At some point the racists need to shut up and just realize that we all were created equal.

__________________
Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it. ---- Mark Twain