For all the ghastliness of our current Democratic party, I still cannot agree with those who say that there's no difference between the Dems and the GOPers. Case in point: Compare the tale of John Edwards aide Andrew Young with the tale of Bush IT guru Mike Connell (see also here and here). One story features high comedy in a fast-food drive-through; the other offers scattered bits of brain matter and flesh.
On the other hand, wasn't there a wiseguy in Vegas who ended up dead after his firm offered a mysterious donation to a certain state senator in Illinois...?
7 comments:
This not relevant, but then again it is.
I keep hearing what a great job Obama did in his debate/talk whatever it was with republicans.
I heard Kieth Olberman, by accident, I avoid him like a rash, have an orgasm on live TV over how intelligent the performance showed Obama was.
Am I the only person who believes this was scripted-that obama had the questions in advance and prepared his responses in advance?
No matter how smart you are, there has to nbe some moment to gather your thoughts if you are hit with an unexpected question. Obama responded to every question with incredibly complex answers full of enormous detail and did not miss a beat. If there was a follow up question however I noticed he said the same thing-that would have to be debated at length later and looked nervous.
Come on-it was scripted-phoney news just like Bush used to make.
Which wise guy from Vegas?
snowflake, I think your point is wrong.
The GOP has a set of talking points that is no secret. Anybody interested in politics with half a mind knows their current talking point list and can create counter-talking points. Nobody would doubt that Clinton could talk circles around any GOP talking points, extemporaneously.
For your position to have merit, Obama would have to have less than half a mind. Few would make that argument, IMO.
And for you to be right, the **GOP caucus** would have to be in on a 'fix' to make BHO appear in the best light. Is that a realistic theory?
XI
I think that he either knew concretely what the questions would be in advance somehow and then agreed to be there or he negotiated with them to get the questions in advance.
It served the republicans purpose to have Obama there because they finally got to ask him some tough questions on tv so it may have been worth it to them to give him the questions to get him there.
I don't believe he just came up with the answers- he is smart enough to have come up with answers but when he does not have prepared responses he fumbles and hems an haws. His responses sounded like memorized speehes.
I always knew when Reagan gave a canned line-it's the same with Obama.
I'm with XI on this one. Any politician worth their salt would have gone in there with a predetermine set of talking points and would have known how to answer a question by either directly answering with a talking point or steering their answer to the prefered or related talking point.
We've all seen how Obama reacts to really unexpected questions or ones he's not prepared to answer. This was not one of those times.
True Dat. Still, reading this CNN list of excerpts I did find the common denominator between Edwards and W:
Despite Edwards' carefully crafted image as a champion for everyday people, he was "irritated by ordinary events. He especially hated making appearances at state fairs, where 'fat rednecks try to shove food down my face. I know I'm the people's senator, but do I have to hang out with them?'"
I watched the whole thing. Obama did a good job, but not an extrodinary job(there were a dozen places where he could have stuck it to the GOP and he didn't), so the idea that he must have had the questions before hand or else he could not have readily known the answeres is a strech. I am not that talented or that smart, but I could have even anticipated the attach lines and talking points. I suppose after Ronny and W anyone with half a brain can pass as a genius.
Post a Comment