Obama says I'm "Hungry for (his) leadership."

[Tactical Progressive]

Aside from the fact that I'm not, my question is - what leadership?

He spent what, seven or eight years in the Illinois State Senate? What levels of leadership did he rise to there?

I mean, if Obama is the natural leader he preens himself to be; if he perceives himself as ready to be the big fish in the big pond, then surely such a natural leader, a national leader, must have risen straight to the top of the little pond ranks, no?

So did he? Or did he leave the Illinois State Senate as just another rank and file Senator after most of a decade?

[bahrbearian]

1. I love that part

"the natural leader he preens himself to be"

[SammyWinstonJack]

56. Well someone preened him, and he bought into it. The man has a huge ego, bought and paid for, by

whom?

[LisaM]

2. Well, he had the extraordinary luck to run against a crook

and then a kook. I'm not dismissing his victory because I think he could have beaten slightly tougher opponents, but his path to victory in the Senate was certainly smoothed by the comic madness of his competition.

[griffi94]

3. why do you hate hope and change

why do you hate america.....yes we can.....why don't you embrace change.....
:beer:

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Frances]

4. It is probable that Obama will be our nominee

I have questions about him too, but I am ready to start focusing on his positive qualities.

[Kittycat]

5. Thank you Frances

:)

[K Gardner]

8. This is probably the first positive and sensible thing I've heard here today from someone

not an Obama supporter. Thank you for restoring my faith in DU, if only temporarily, Frances ! :hi:

[bpeale]

22. i'm not willing to think in positives until all these negatives get addressed

until then, obama can go fly a kite

[Tactical Progressive]

41. Isn't that convenient Frances?

Just hours after Obama takes a small delegate lead you want people to stop questioning him.

Were you posting admonitions to 'focus on Hillary's positive qualities' against all of the Obama supporter bile, for the preceeding year in which it was 'probable that she will be our nominee'?

You must have posted that incessantly, huh?

[Frances]

46. Almost all of my posts have been requests for people

to think about the general election.

I was leaning Edwards until he dropped out. Then I agonized for a long time about who to vote for.

My husband and daughter and many political friends voted for one candidate.

I and a few of my friends voted for the other candidate.

I have very good relations with people who voted for both candidates.

I would like for DUers to have respect both of our candidates as well.

And yes, I posted many requests for Obama supporters to be respectful of Hillary.

[bunnies]

6. Dont vote for him then.

Its really just that fucking simple.

[bpeale]

23. don't worry. i won't. and neither will a lot of "his base"

they will forget about him long before election day.

[skipos]

7. That is exactly how I feel about

Clinton. She touts all this "experience" and I really don't like much of what she has done with it.

[thoughtcrime1984]

13. Experience= 35 years married to Bill?

Dealing with bad and dangerous men all her life?

[Bucky]

43. Boo! No more cheap shots.

Not even funny ones. Please, we'll need these people behind us after we stomp them in Ohio and Texas.

[K Gardner]

9. Look.. you're not going to change anyone's mind here. We've done our homework. Now you

do yours. If you don't like him, just don't freakin vote for him. But this is just juvenile sophistry.

[BuyingThyme]

10. Barack Obama tried to lead us away from the holocaust in Iraq.

Hillary Clinton led us into it.

Obama wins on the leadership issue.

[ccpup]

18. bullshit

from the safety of his State Senate seat in a liberal district in Chicago, he made a speech. One speech.

He then votes as US Senator time and time again to continue funding the war. Where are the speeches from the US Senate floor against this war? Where is the legislation and the demands to end this IMMEDIATELY from the Senate Floor? Where's the anti-war leadership he made his name on in Illinois when we need it most?

Nowhere.

He does NOT win on the leadership issue. He's ducking behind his desk, voting Present with his finger in the wind and protecting his skinny political butt as always.

[BuyingThyme]

27. I didn't even see that speech. I saw him make the case in a televised interview.

One speech? Nope. Sorry. You made that up.

And how is it that your fuzzy math gives Hillary the advantage when it comes to funding the war?

Obama wins the leadership issues hands down.

[ccpup]

37. you're joking, right?

a speech I made up? although I'll correct myself by noting it was at an anti-war rally while he was State Senator in 2002, the speech itself is hardly made up.

an excerpt and a link:

Seeking to recharge his campaign for the autumn stretch run, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Tuesday used the fifth anniversary of his 2002 speech against going to war in Iraq to issue some of his strongest criticism yet of the war votes cast by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and other Democratic presidential candidates.

In a hotel ballroom packed with more than 1,000 people in this Iowa City suburb, Obama invoked the 2002 speech Tuesday night as proof that he possesses superior judgment, even if he lacks extensive experience in Washington.

...

Another candidate, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (Conn.), argued that Obama's charges contradicted his statement before the 2004 Democratic presidential convention that he did not fault John F. Kerry and John Edwards for their votes in favor of the war resolution because he did not know what intelligence they had access to.

...

Edwards, who has since apologized for his war vote, also took aim Tuesday at Obama, criticizing him for failing to follow up on his war opposition while in the Senate. "Senator Obama likes to talk about his speech on Iraq years ago," said Edwards spokeswoman Colleen Murray, "but the truth is he did support past funding requests that only helped prolong this war."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/02/AR2007100202036.html

And I said nothing at all about giving Hillary the advantage -- despite your clumsy attempts to put words in my mouth -- when it comes to funding the war. What I said was he's voted to fund the war every chance he's gotten in spite of his vaunted and purely self-given stance as an "anti-war candidate".

But if you find comfort in the fairy tale of Barack "winning" the leadership issue, go ahead.

[BuyingThyme]

62. No, you made up your contention that all he did was to make a speech.

I said that's not all he did. I was right. You are wrong.

And, yes, you did give Hillary the advantage by claiming that she's a better leader. She's not. She's far worse because she led us into the holocaust in Iraq. On the funding issue, it's a draw. That's why you decided to use the funding votes as a distraction because you did not want to address the war issue directly.

But it's not all about the funding no matter how hard you try to pretend otherwise. Leading the country into war matters. It's huge. It's a question of right and wrong. It's a question of life and death.

It's a question of Obama versus Clinton.

[bpeale]

24. uh, obama was not in the senate so who knows what he would have done

we only have "his word" for any of it

[BuyingThyme]

29. Same with everybody in this forum.

That's why he's so popular here. We know how it works.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[theaxe7]

49. That's a little extreme....hey look, it's another lima bean that looks like The Leader

you'd better put it with the others

[sniffa]

61. Haha the zombie got tombstoned

your other one's next. :bounce:

[DemGa]

11. Just join the movement...join the movement...join the movement...

"I want to speak directly to all those Americans who have yet to join this movement but still hunger for change: we need you.

[ccpup]

12. exactly

I wonder how good he would look if the MSM wasn't handling him with kid gloves while upper-cutting his opponent every chance they get. And I find it fascinating that he styles himself a Constitutional Law Professor when he was actually a Senior Lecturer and, in a move that still confuses many in that profession to this day, didn't write or publish anything during his tenure.

He hasn't led. To him, the promise to lead inserted into a speech long on rhetoric and short on detail is just another part to play in order to further charm the glassy-eyed hordes. It's a good line -- one of many he has -- that means nothing to him in his career so far.

But if the Dems want to pick their own version of bush (nice guy, good to have a beer with, platitudes and promises with little if any experience), then we'll just have to hunker down for the disaster to come.

[rug]

14. I've no hunger for more pie in the sky.

[FrenchieCat]

15. I'm surprised that you have not informed yourself on this......

real surprised, Tactical Progressive!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4578207&mesg_id=4578207


and this, which of all people, you would appreciate!

Delivered on 26 October 2002 at an anti-war rally

I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech

[Tactical Progressive]

30. I've seen your boilerplate from the link, FrenchieCat

It's not impressive. I bet any State Senator could show that much if not much, much more.

Neither is his pretense at being against the IWR from your excerpt here even slightly impressive. Less than zero on that one.


More directly though, neither his thin record as a State Senator, nor his phony anti-IWR credentials, directly address the question I asked - What kind of leadership levels did Obama rise to in his small pond in Illinois?

Do you have an answer for that?

[FrenchieCat]

33. Can you provide me with Hillary's accomplishments, please?

know I already know that she worked for the Children's Defense Fund for less than a year.

I think that Hillary having every single fucking advantages to be the inevitable winner in this race, and the fact that she didn't plan anything other than winning Feb 5th, is telling of her "leadership" qualities. In fact, the ready from day one is a bunch of shit.

[FrenchieCat]

38. I'm still waiting.

[Tactical Progressive]

39. Start your own thread FrenchieCat

I've seen plenty of people post a huge long list of Hillary's accomplishments here, so I know you have to.

Go read that and stop dumping your boilerplate on my thread hon.

This thread asked a specific question which you have avoided answering twice now.

If you've got an answer, let's hear it. If you want a rundown of Hillary's accomplishments, start your own thread.

[FrenchieCat]

40. No...I usually see a data dump that doesn't really provide

her bills sponsored passed in the senate for her 8 years...thus far.

Do you have those?

[johnnydrama]

45. why

Everybody and their mother was saying how easy the war would be, that within months Iraq would be free, the dictator would be gone, and democracy would be on the march.

This was the safe bet. Most people believed it. The majority of the American people believed it. The press was saying it was a slam dunk.

So how was coming out against the war in such a big way, the "Safe" way to go? That's bullshit.

The easy thing to do was go along with the war, so if you're right you can say you're right, and if you're wrong, you can say everybody else was wrong too.

Speaking out against the war at that time, when 80% of America though it was a good idea, and would be a cakewalk was a hugely brave thing to do.

[cooolandrew]

16. He got a Grammy and a muliti million selling book. =)

[ccpup]

19. and so does Hillary

what's your point?

[bpeale]

25. i read his book. it was crap

[FrenchieCat]

34. I loved it. So I believe that your opinion doesn't mean a thing.

In fact, I actually doubt that you read, let alone an entire book! :)

[bpeale]

35. well, we got it in our library & i put a slip in it to be the first to check it out

so i did read it ... all of it ... and IMO it was crap

[FrenchieCat]

36. Considering your lack of specifics, I doubt your story.

Your articulation of the details gives you away.

[SoxFan]

58. Spot on, Frenchie

My Gaullic Feline Friend has called your bluff. You haven't read either of Obama's books.

[sniffa]

17. good for you

:thumbsup:

[quickesst]

20. If anyone doubts...

Obama's ability to lead, all they have to do is attend services on any of the weekdays. The Reverends Tucker and Matthews are very convincing. Thanks.
quickesst

[Freida5]

21. Obama has to be the most unaccomplished Presidential candidate since George Bush

[bpeale]

26. exactly! already been there & done that & don't want to do it again

[tyne]

28. Unaccomplished?

Barack Obama? Are you KIDDING me?

Evidently you know nothing about the man.

[KAZ]

31. Man, your smart. I never thought of that.

[ShortnFiery]

32. Obama has to be the most unaccomplished Presidential candidate since Bill Clinton

How does that one WEAR for you? ;)

[VotesForWomen]

44. Yep, the parallels are undeniable. nt

[Bucky]

42. Look at the enthusiasm behind his campaign. THAT, my friend, is leadership...

... in action.

[Levgreee]

50. It seems he is leading millions of people quite well right now, doesn't it?

[KoKo]

51. He's HUNGRY for HOPE...for CHANGE! you question this?

Well...lots of us do. Let's hope he moves on from those early declarations to become the Populist Candidate who can carry Edward's Torch Message...

If he ain't too skeered to do it.... after the "Powers that Be" (PTB) GET TO HIM...and corrupt him like they do all the rest........

[Tactical Progressive]

52. Anyone? Anyone? Obama's rise to leadership in the state Senate?

Anyone?

[Occam Bandage]

53. He did. What's more, he rose right out of the little pond, and right out of the big pond. I think

you can't possibly point to a man who was an unknown four years ago, who is now the frontrunner for the Presidency, and say "that man is not a natural leader."

[NastyRiffraff]

54. He rose out of the little pond because Kerry sponsored him..

And gave him the opportunity to give the keynote at the Democratic National Convention. He made what many saw as an inspiring speech, and admittedly it was a good one. That got name recognition, then he ran for the Senate against a Republican my cat could beat. He managed to keep is name front and center by declaring he wouldn't run for president, and instead serve out his Senate term, when few were begging him to run. Then he formed an "exploratory committee" and the rest is history.

Leadership? Yeah, he can speak, although I seem to be immune to the evangelical-type speeches. A lot of self-promotion, but I don't see a lot of leadership. However, I will vote for him if he's the nominee. Anything but McCain.

[Tactical Progressive]

55. Anyone? Anyone? Obama leadership rise as State Senator?

How far did he rise through the ranks as a State Senator?

Anyone?

[SoxFan]

57. It doesn't matter

Certain people have the temperament and personality to be a legislative leader. Others do not. It takes a very different mindset and set of skills than that of being a president.

JFK was not cut out to be a legislative leader, but he was a good president. The ability to inspire, to set the agenda, to bring people of differing beliefs to the table are the sort of skills Kennedy and Obama posses. Someone like Robert Byrd or Bob Dole are a different type. They revel in minutiae, are deal-makers and behind the scenes operators. You need both types to forge a successful government.

I served in the legislature for three terms, and I know many, many excellent legislators, some of whom will someday be governor or members of Congress, who had no interest in serving in a leadership capacity. Some people, myself included, operate better outside the formal party structure, where we can work on issues like ethics reform.

[Tactical Progressive]

59. What, because he says so?

He's got virtually no experience in federal governance since he started working on a Presidential run almost as soon as he became a Senator, against his promises I might add. He has no executive experience (he actually has the temerity to say that running his campaign is executive experience, meaning everyone who ever runs for any office anywhere has 'executive experience'). He has a skimpy state Senate career. I don't see any leadership anywhere.

And now you've got the 'audacity' to compare him to JFK because what, they both wore pants and shoes? JFK led a PT boat crew in wartime, saving them after it was sunk. He was a US Senator for how many years?

After all of Obama's talk about his "leadership", already in lieu of his dearth of experience and accomplishment, I ask then how did his 'leadership' assert itself in the small pond of Illinois state legislature?

And you think even that doesn't matter. Nothing matters to you. All that matters is that he says so. And his followers follow him so that makes him a leader, in some perverted, circular definition of the very word.


The question stands for the rest of us that are looking at the real world of serious governance against the Publicans, who aren't interested in a Sanjaya of the political persuasion. Who see see nothing but an empty suit reading sermony words off a teleprompter.

What purported leadership? How far did the king of self-proclaimed leadership rise in the ranks of the small pond of a state legislature with his natural leadership abilities?

How far?

Anyone? Anyone?

[jackson_dem]

60. He brought both parties together in the U.S. Senate to pass one bill

The agent of change was able to get the rethugs to vote against their interests and agree to rename a post office! Amazing feat!