US News
Jan 16, 2007, 16:25 GMT
Obama takes first step toward 2008 presidential bid
And Also
Similar articles
- Democratic presidential candidate quits race
- Former Massachusetts governor starts 2008 White House bid (Roundup)
- Former Massachusetts governor declares 2008 White House bid
- Obama declares candidacy for US presidency in 2008
- Wild card Obama tests waters for 2008 presidential bid (Roundup)
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Obama seeks 'surgical' effort to tackle US unemployment
- 2. Americans see diminishing role in world, China's rise
- 3. Washington Times to cut work force by 40 per cent
- 4. White House gate crashers boycott Congress invite
- 5. Gates expects quick progress on closing Guantanamo
Older Talkback
Senator Obama has been in public life/office for a very short period of time. He has virtually no track record and no international experience. He is charismatic and speaks well (alas something our current president sorely lacks) - but why do so many think that he has what it takes to be president of our country?
What has he done that makes anyone think he 'has what it takes'? ..and please, no comparatives (that means don't simply say - he can do better than so and so) - what is it OTHER than charisma and a few generic speaches where he carefully avoids difficult positions, that give any impression of his ability?
What do we know about Obama other then he is black?
I can't support someone till they give me some idea of
where they want to take the country. Cheap political
Rhetoric doesnt cut it. Give me details!
This article was interesting... but poorly written. Why should Barack Obama be ever-referred to as 'African-American Senator'? We don't see the other senators referred to as 'Caucasian Senator'. It's unnecessary and inflammatory.
Similarly, not referring to the Democratic party by name but instead as 'the left-of-centre' party seems to paint the opposition, the Republicans, as centrist, when the current administration is far, far right-of-centre. If anything, Obama is a centrist.
Thank you for your time.
Our Constitution is at stake, make no mistake about it. This man(though lacks political experience which is favorable)has not yet been corrupted by the despotic system that so much wants to destroy what most of us as citizens want so much to protect, but haven't really ever understood why. we are being recolonized at a rapid rate by the illegal invasion forces fully in effect. the reason for this is because of the accelerated growth of our technology and the ability of ppl being able to become more aware of whats happening around them. Thus the one(new) world order initiative has had to recklessy speed up their process as well to achieve their ultimate sinister objective. Our constitution stands in their way. they are scared to death of it and what it represents and they know that if it doesn't fail through the obvious despotic oppression taking place today. Then they will in fact lose control and power over the people. the constitution must be protected ladies and gentlemen and Obama has yet to be corrupted. Ronald Reagan was asked once after he was shot, what he wants. He replied 'World Peace'. We must protect the constitution and we need a president at the helm that hasn't been corrupted by the current despotic system of things. If we allow ourselves to fully accept despotism our constitution will most certainly fail. Our constitution is the only one like it in the world ladies and gentlemen. It's the only thing between us the good guys and them the bad guys. If you want peace we must protect the constitution.Though it is imperfect(as such the case with all of mans endeavours) it is our key weapon(along with knowledge) against the despotic system of things trying to control us. lets end it once and for all. We now have been given the upper hand here. Lets get it done.
Rhetoric is what will be used to try and disclaim my previous post, however the facts as seen today are most certainly undeniable.
If Mr. Obama stands any hope of winning this next election, he MUST vote NO on any amnesty and seal our borders so as to protect the sovereignty of this country. Who's that silencedogood?
A better question to ask instead of 'where does he want to take the country?' Will he protect the constitution and the constitutional representative republic it represents from both foreign and/or domestic threat of despotic destruction?' It's a tall order no doubt, and i believe he hasn't considered this part yet himself yet to this extent but he has one thing to make him fully aware of the path for which he is about to take..........us 'WE THE PEOPLE' not the sinister despotic one(new)world order machine. But first we all must be fully aware ourselves of the events truly taking place. For those who know shine the light for them, get everybody up to speed. Hold town and/or block meetings, rent halls, pool resources, barter if necessary, but make everyone that you can aware.
These are just just a few key links you might find of interest.
http://www.manews.org/1006razamoney.html
http://www.trilateral.org/projwork/tfrsums/tfr57.htm
http://www.trilateral.org/
http://www.nascocorridor.com
http://www.kcsmartport.com
http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com
http://www.numbersusa.com
http://www.cis.org
These are a list of just a few sites you might want to check out and see for yourselves. Then truly look with you own eyes. If what they are doing is so good for everybody, then why didn't they just come right out and tell us all? carefully read thru everything here. It helps explain alot. I personally do not subscribe to their point of view. They were not forthcoming, nor were they honest with us about any of this.
P.S. pass these links on to everyone you know and/or care about.
Well.............It sure makes one see the picture. It also explains our total lack for rule of law within regards to the illegal immigration issue. We have our hands full. Thank you for the links by the way.
Here you go.
http://www.fuse.tv/videos/index.php?p=clip3773
SUPPORT NET NEUTRALITY.
Thank you.
I would love to see a contemporary definition of 'political experience'. Moreover, I would love to know who believes that emperical political experiences can only be gained via Washington D.C.? I question just how much of this 'political experience' we really want our future commanders-in-chief to possess? We gain our own relevant international experiences through our dealings nations and people from other nations.
How many of us here in these pages have even spent time anywhere other than America. Sure, there are those of you who have. And it is you that have the most relevant canvass upon which to construct your noteworthy arguments. However, do we think that a person of mixed race, particularly one that is Black, has no insight into international issues and concerns. Do we think that someone like this Senator, Mr. Obama, doesn't possess the intellect and political savvy to educate himself and the staff he'd assemble to grasp these issues?
Do we assume that every president we have elected in the past was highly politically experienced and possessed international political experience as well? I am just curious about these things, because it baffles me how we draw conclusions and make pointed assumptions through our own paradigms and convictions. Exactly how much international political experience did George W. Bush possess upon assuming the presidency? I ask out of ignorance--not to be smug and rhetorical.
Lastly, someone tell me what the perfect presidential cadidate would be? Give me details, on views, record, outlook etc.
You bring up some very relevant points. My response is this, first and foremost he or she must protect the constitution and 'Republic' for which it stands. He or she shall view redundancy as a key tool in matters dealing with foreign and/or domestic diplomacy issues and not as a mere hindrance. The constitution and the 'Republic' it represents shall always have precedence.
P.S. I have.;) The political experience as well as foreign relations experience he lacks(per say)offers us a candidate not yet corrupted(and hopefully will not be). but as seen so plainly throughout our constitution it shows to us how we should not trust our government. Our founding brethren had a serious distrust for government and it shows in the constitution. As seen today we should be able to understand why. That is one key element of why it is so imperative to protect the constitution of these United States. They told us within it that this would happen.
Speaking of redundancy, has anybody in here thought of a vice presidential candidate?
I would like to see Ron Paul as the vice president. Why not?
Instead of trying to give a laundry list of what I look for in a president (or any elected official) - the primary qualifier for me is experience.
What have they done so far in their life? Do they walk the walk or just talk? Have they had to face and deal with extremely difficult choices and how have they handled adverse situations?
No president governs alone. A close look at their friends and key advisers is also warranted. Many times, some insight can be gained by the associates we keep.
Honesty and integrity are the fundamental cornerstones that must be present. But those alone are not enough - experience is required.
You do not truly know a person until you see how they act/react in truly difficult situations. Only then, does their true character show.
Experience in making difficult choices? We've all had to make them. However i do agree with your ideology as it pertains to the measure of one's character. For establishing that point i must commend you.
I am thrilled that Obama has decided to use his God-given talents as a mission to lead our country once Bush is out. I will continue to write the Senator and my local Democratic committees in support of his decision. To those who way that he is too new and inexperienced, Martin Luther King was 35 when he was killed in his ministry as a memorial black leader.
John Kennedy, while coming from a family of politicians, had vision and insights for our country. In his inaughural speech, he challenged the citizens 'ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.' He too was young. He knew how to make use of the media and press to guide our country. The fact that he was Catholic was a low priority when voters looked at his other qualities.
He wasn't encouraging young men to sign up to go to a foreign land to kill or be killed.
Thanks people for the commentary. This has been some really good dialog and I am once again pleased that it can take place without piranah like attacks. Seems we as a people are so much smarter than we have been in a long time. With open minds and hearts focused on what is right, I am certain we can make progress.
Not one person here has been venemous or arrogant about their views or position. No one has had the tone that many minorities would have expected. It is nice to be wrong, and see preconceived notions taking a back seat to everyone's interest in good government.
This makes me hopeful that, this time, we won't be easily misled and can come out of this next race with a candidate that knows times are changing. I just want to see someone of substance and integrity get in there and do the best they can for us. I am open to a review of all the prospective cnadidates, and even taking a look at the ones I would have known nothing much about had it not been for my conversations with you folk.
Thanks for you time, and may the best candidate for our nation emerge and win!
Your Talkback on this Story