How Barack Obama Sees the World's Challenges

Huh?

Mr. Eck, may I ask what makes you believe that McCain/Palin are best suited for leadership? The perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks had nothing to do with Iraq. Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq, they were primarily in Afghanistan at that time. So "confronting our enemies" if we were smart would have meant focusing much more heavily on Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Saddam Hussein was a horrible dictator, but he had no connection to Al Qaeda and as the world now knows there never were any weapons of mass destruction. Our invasion of Iraq was a very poor decision, and Obama is one of the few leaders in the US who saw that at the time and had the guts to say so. To me, that alone makes him a more qualified leader because his judgment is better. And Palin, she has some serious unanswered ethical questions to resolve for someone claiming to be a reformer.

campaign 2008

I am fully convinced that M,CAIN Pilan are the best for our country. We are in a time when we must confront our enemies in order to maintain respect. Let us not forget 9/11 and the insane breed that caused the hovac against innocent peoples. m,CAIN AND Pilan are the best suited for the leadership inb the white house. I most certianly hope that they win in Nov regardless of what the world thinks about the candidates in our natio. 97/11 did occur in their country and we can do without their opinion. I am an American temporarily residing in Norway and I shall vote by proxy. Pilan is s rising star and good luck to her in Nov.

to Jim

Jim, that statement is just plain stupid. And insulting. How could you be so belligerent as to believe I want defeat?

I suspect it's because you are one of those poor saps who can only see every situation in black or white. Iraq is win or lose. Baloney. Use you brain, pal.

If I think the US is wrong, I will say so. That's called free speech, look into it.

If you weren't so busy seeing things like a 6-yr-old you might concede that by now we could have fully accomplished our real and true missions in Afghantistan and Pakistan--bringing to justice those behind 9/11--had we not been unnecessarily diverted into the quagmire we created in Iraq.

But, in thinking like yours, I guess you just don't care if we ever bring Bin Laden to justice, and you just don't care about the victims of 9/11. All black & white. Idiot.

Dales' prayer for defeat

Re:Dales "light " What is clear,is not that an overwhelming force of approximatley 500,000 ground troops would be able to establish the stability neccesary for the new democratically elected Iraqi government to succeed & ultimately rejoin the world community-It's simply that you don't want it to succeed Dale,which is what you fail to distinguish.

re: Where's the Beef?

That's a fair question. I think I can shed some light.

Sen. Obama as you know as opposed our actions in Iraq from the beginning. When the idea of a surge was floated, Obama (and probably anyone else opposed to our current Iraq strategy) opposed it because it was like the old saying "throwing good money after bad" meaning it was compounding what was from the beginning a mistake by doing more of it.

That is NOT the same as saying, "It won't work." Do you understand the difference? Whether it will "work" or not is an irrelevant question if you oppose the current occupation in its entirety.

For example, while I too have opposed our actions in Iraq from the beginning I will concede 100% right here and now that if we send an additional 500,000 troops we will achieve some sort of positive result with that extra manpower. Do you see what I mean? I'm not saying it won't work, I'm saying we shouldn't do it...and those are two very different things that you are not distinguishing.

how could any educated american

VOTE REPUBLICAN????

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY REPRESENTS THE WEALTHY AND THE REDNECKS.

Where's the Beef?

I hear rhetoric and I hear how McCain is out of touch...but I'm not hearing anything that really smacks of evidence that Obama really knows what is going on. Obama cannot admit he was wrong about the surge and McCain was right. Why won't he? Time and again McCain shows wisdom on world events, and statements to the contrary are just politically motivated bloviating that are not supported by fact.

To Ken

If Obama is only "in it for himself" then why was he the only candidate who had the courage and brains to call out the gas tax holiday idea for exactly what is was: a fairly useless idea that would provide very little relief and cause more problems that it would solve?

This insinuation about his IL record of voting present - Obama said in IL it's often a signal that tells other legislators: 1)you support the GOAL of the bill but 2)will not vote for it AS WRITTEN. He explained that the value in that is so if it fails and is brought back for a 2nd run the sponsor knows they have a strong potential base of additional support in anyone who voted Present, so a starting point for round 2 is to talk to those folks and see what they didn't like about the first version. That explanation not only made sense to me but also told me he's being appropriately thoughtful with each vote, and it seems to indicate his ultimate goal is expedient passage of good legislation.

These are two small examples of substance that tell me he is smarter and better for our country than anyone else running.

What, exactly, brings you to the conclusion he's a "consummate politician" or that he's "apt to bring old concepts..."? Give me something concrete, something reasonable. You sound like just another ill-informed American making poor decisions based on something other than reason. Our country does not need that.

Did you even read "Audacity of Hope"? It is brilliance, yet most who dismiss Sen. Obama have not even read it, even though it lays out far more policy ideas than we will ever get from another candidate. Talk about lemmings.

To: Dale of CA

For the record I've voted democratic president longer than Obama. This will be my first vote for a republican president. Dale, you pontificate on your studies of all the candidates has nothing substantial. As you say, what I say is my opinion, so may I say the same for you.

To be pellucid I find Obama a consummate politician trying to get elected.

He's apt to bring old concepts to the board repackage and promote as change. I got a kick out of when the price of oil was near it's all-time high he wanted to get rid of speculators from the market. It was reminisce of Nixon freezing the markets. Yes, that didn't work very well either. Even currently with the government takeover of Fannie mae and mac they need investors (speculators, it's all semantic) to work. I reiterate Obama is in this for himself (even the book made him extremely wealthy {which only sold that many copies because of the lemmings}).

ken is an idiot

ken doesn't know what he's talking about. If Obama wasn't a leader how did he raise so much money in the primaries, how did he get a crowd of 200,000 in germany, how did he fill up Invesco field?

He has followers... hmmmm. What do you call people who are influential and have followers?

Ken is an idiot