Comments on: The Right and The Speech http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/03/the-right-and-the-speech Loaning brain cells to those in need since 2003 Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:51:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Kyle E. Moore http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/03/the-right-and-the-speech#comment-26949 Kyle E. Moore Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:21:48 +0000 http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/03/the-right-and-the-speech#comment-26949 Well, it will be interesting. Doing some reading (I have the time, but i just don't think I have the energy to write a whole lot tonight) there seems to be a growing consensus that Obama should have won this a long time ago, and the media has kept this charade going on for too long. Mark Halperin has a piece over at the Politico where he references Clinton staffers wh0 acknowledge that she has only about a 10% chance of winning the nomination, and to be honest with you, I only give her that much because of the Wright thing. For Super Delegates, it really is a decision between whether the Speech and all the stuff it brings with it, the risk of racial understanding, the risk of addressing Americans as adults, and everything else, whether that is a net positive, or Wright is a net negative that we can't afford to risk. Had I not pledged not to be so antagonistic towards other Democratic candidtes (...), I would point out that other candidates in this field have just as much dirty laundry if not more that also equates to potentially fatal liabilities. Shorter: I still maintain that Clinton is not so vetted as she would have us believe. But my greater point is this, we should not be deciding upon a candidate based on their negatives, but instead their positives. Both Democratic candidates have positives, but only Obama is able to give that speech, only Obama is willing to treat Americans like adults. On raw paper in ones and zeroes on issues, Obama comes out as a more marginally progressive candidate than Hillary on some issues, a marginally less progressive candidate on others. But in terms of less tangible leadership qualities, she doesn't touch him, not in the slightest. that should be what governs the SD and our own decision making processes. Well, it will be interesting. Doing some reading (I have the time, but i just don’t think I have the energy to write a whole lot tonight) there seems to be a growing consensus that Obama should have won this a long time ago, and the media has kept this charade going on for too long. Mark Halperin has a piece over at the Politico where he references Clinton staffers wh0 acknowledge that she has only about a 10% chance of winning the nomination, and to be honest with you, I only give her that much because of the Wright thing.

For Super Delegates, it really is a decision between whether the Speech and all the stuff it brings with it, the risk of racial understanding, the risk of addressing Americans as adults, and everything else, whether that is a net positive, or Wright is a net negative that we can’t afford to risk.

Had I not pledged not to be so antagonistic towards other Democratic candidtes (…), I would point out that other candidates in this field have just as much dirty laundry if not more that also equates to potentially fatal liabilities. Shorter: I still maintain that Clinton is not so vetted as she would have us believe.

But my greater point is this, we should not be deciding upon a candidate based on their negatives, but instead their positives. Both Democratic candidates have positives, but only Obama is able to give that speech, only Obama is willing to treat Americans like adults. On raw paper in ones and zeroes on issues, Obama comes out as a more marginally progressive candidate than Hillary on some issues, a marginally less progressive candidate on others. But in terms of less tangible leadership qualities, she doesn’t touch him, not in the slightest.

that should be what governs the SD and our own decision making processes.

]]> By: Dynamic http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/03/the-right-and-the-speech#comment-26948 Dynamic Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:01:39 +0000 http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/03/the-right-and-the-speech#comment-26948 That's one point that needs to be raised to the cynics. This speech was in no way a plea for support. It was not a get out the vote bone thrown to supporters. At no point did Obama go out and say "vote for me, I deserve it." This was not a campaign speech. It was an intelligent and compassinate man speaking as a civil rights leader, whatever his other positions and responsibilities. Viewed from that perspective, people may have an easier time understanding how important it was. And then again, they may not. :lol: But Obama was willing to take a chance on the American people, and I am too. That’s one point that needs to be raised to the cynics. This speech was in no way a plea for support. It was not a get out the vote bone thrown to supporters. At no point did Obama go out and say “vote for me, I deserve it.” This was not a campaign speech. It was an intelligent and compassinate man speaking as a civil rights leader, whatever his other positions and responsibilities.

Viewed from that perspective, people may have an easier time understanding how important it was.

And then again, they may not. :lol: But Obama was willing to take a chance on the American people, and I am too.

]]>