The Obamas and Oprah ... here's my issue

[Fredda Weinberg]

Observing the two girls, I see a disturbing need for attention, a willingness to behave for approval and ... in the younger, none of the polished composure that hides the motivations for everyone on the stage.

It's a dream - a lovely dream ... but it rained in the daytime during Camelot and the last time we had small children in the WH, we could be distracted by family antics. This is a presidential candidate who hasn't faced his own teen's rebellion and if anyone is unproven, it's a young dad.

Happy feet vocabulary will get us only so far ... I've waited for practical responses to intractable issues, not excuses for the way they are. When I hear talk about hope, I hear easy answers - but progress is made with compromise and reciprocity. FDR & LBJ walked in w/a portfolio of owed favors.

Even the talk about unity makes me nervous. Michael Eric Dyson, a professor at Georgetown University "who has studied racial identity" according to today's NYTimes, describes Obama as a member of his own tribe. Would Oprah have campaigned for a white candidate?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

1. This is satire, right? n/t

[Fredda Weinberg]

3. I wish. Got a substantial retort? n/t

[Nick_Irving]

24. OBAMA SUPPORTS WAR

Obama Supports the Iraq war plain and simple.

This video explains it.

Attention Democrat Voters: Who's Progressive?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_WBT35CKBs

[surfermaw]

60. Oabama will be in war in a different area

he will be in protecting diamond minning...wonder who that would be for.

[Girlieman]

43. Not satire, maybe just too insightful for sound bite junkies

The OP made a really good point about FDR and LBJ's portfolios of owed favors.

The President can't change anything by himself. He needs Congress. Oprah might be helpful with a certain segment of the population (and one might give real thought about what segment of the population that is, and whether that's the base we want for the *next big thing*), but Oprah won't get bills passed in Congress.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

44. If Obama's campaing strategy was based solely on Oprah you might have a point.

Also...

. Oprah might be helpful with a certain segment of the population (and one might give real thought about what segment of the population that is, and whether that's the base we want for the *next big thing*

No, I certainly wouldn't want African-Americans and women playing any role in our party. That would be a disaster.

[Girlieman]

76. Oprah (cont.)

"No, I certainly wouldn't want African-Americans and women playing any role in our party. That would be a disaster."

Interesting that when I dis Oprah, you think it's because she's an AA woman. Perhaps that's your projection, but it's not my point.

When I see Oprah, I think talk show host. This is a person who has made millions of dollars exploiting other people's misery and titillating the stay at home crowd with her freak shows.

That's my point, but you see only race.

Interesting.

[cali]

2. *snicker*

hard to respond to this gobbledy gook with anything but amusement.

[Fredda Weinberg]

4. Just the enlightened, thoughtful comment I've come to expect

Does your son have anything to say?

[cali]

11. there is absolutely no point in responding substantively

to vile small mindedness, without a lick of intelligence.

[Fredda Weinberg]

15. So your mother didn't teach you? What do you say when you have

nothing positive to contribute?

[JI7]

5. more crap

[Fredda Weinberg]

7. 3 for 3 ... heart w/o head ... if this the Obama campaign, it won't be long n/t

[sandnsea]

6. I never expected this from you

appalling.

[cali]

8. you should have.

this is right up the OP's alley. And an ugly one it is.

[Fredda Weinberg]

12. Ugly? Why ... people are people. There's nothing ugly about us

or our need for attention ... and remain vigilant from those who would influence us for their own purposes, however honorable. My tone has been mild ... yours personal and invective.

[Fredda Weinberg]

9. These are my concerns. Can you address them instead of responding

from your guts?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

10. Your concerns are that his kids aren't old enough and that Oprah is black?

Geez.

[Fredda Weinberg]

13. That's an interesting twist ... but you didn't answer the question.

If I said I support a Jewish candidate for being Jewish, you could be offended ... but you attack me for pointing out what is apparently obvious about Oprah? Interesting

[MADem]

25. Why would you care if someone got offended? That's THEIR problem.

If you want to support a Jew for being a Jew, that's up to you. If someone "takes offense," well, fuck them.

There's no checklist that has to be ticked off in order for a candidate to "earn" support. It's a not insignificant part of why Lieberman got away with so much crap--I know Jews who held their noses and sent the contribution to him even after he changed parties, and only because he was a Jewish Senator.

I know Armenians who don't care what party the Armenian politician is from--he "gets the check" because of the heritage. No questions, and "Don't be cheap!"

All politics IS local. I have unreasonable affection for many Massachusetts politicians, and I give them a pass where I might excoriate some poor bastard from Wisconsin or Montana for the same behavior. All politics is also emotional, and the rules for supporting a candidate are this: There ARE no rules. If you like them, then you can support them.

[Fredda Weinberg]

27. Can we agree there should be political dialogue?

For example, I could have different responses and opinions based on different experiences. You may, or may not, be interested in hearing and reacting.

The only rule ... let's be polite.

Agreed?

[MADem]

62. I'm not being rude to you. I'm plainly deconstructing what you wrote, and

telling you that you're off base.

[Fredda Weinberg]

78. Off base how? For you, localilty matter ... I supported a senatorial

candidate almost a decade ago who bought a house specifically to run in my state. It was part of a long term plan and we followed. According to you, this should not have worked, but it did. So, how am I off base? My candidate won re-election six years later.

[MADem]

101. Your support of other candidates is irrelevant to this discussion, as is your heritage, your

gender, even your weight. Certainly not your oblique reference to Clinton coming from out of state and locating in NY to run for office (just like RFK and others have--NY has a long tradition of that).

None of that matters.

What matters is what you said about two children, really. I've articulated my views more directly elsewhere in this thread. Your comments were inapropriate, and dare I say, 'disturbing.' THAT's how you are off base.

[Egnever]

82. Sweet post

[MADem]

102. Thank you very much! nt

[sandnsea]

14. To a racist attack against him and his girls??

Are you saying that came from your head??

[Fredda Weinberg]

19. Racist attack? Where the heck is that? n/t

[indimuse]

39. get used to it!

Question Obama's record..wife's record..lies...YOU ARE A RACIST! :wow:

[MADem]

63. Where does "pick on his little children" fit in there?

And FWIW, I'm not an Obama acolyte. Some hits ARE over the line.

[babylonsister]

16. How the heck do you know anythiing about his kids? That's low, even

for you. You're troubled and nervous; maybe you need a doctor. :eyes:

[Fredda Weinberg]

20. I described what I saw ... were your impressions different? If so, please

elaborate. If not, my reaction is my own and I stated it with as neutral language as I could. I'm not nervous ... my concerns are legitimate considering I'm a first generation American whose family has seen racial hatred. I've also lived through a race riot in Brooklyn, with just a shoe in the head because MLK had died that day.

Low? I'm making a contribution to a process - you've indulged your feelings.

[lapfog_1]

17. Let me understand you...

you are saying that because Barak Obama has 2 smaller children, that's a reason to not want him to be our candidate for President... because he is an "unproven" dad and it will distract him?

and then you end up your argument with something like an accusation of reverse racism?

Obama as a member of his own tribe? Oprah wouldn't campaign for a white candidate?

That's what you are saying, correct???

[Fredda Weinberg]

22. That's a fun editing game, but I kept my OP short.

Do you remember what were considered to be legitimate concerns about Chelsea when Bill first entered office? I didn't even mention that as a reason for not support Obama ... but of course, it's out there. My description was of the children on stage while their father accepted victory in Iowa. I was specifically looking for their reaction, expecting it to be more honest. Of course it was ... the youngest was literally dancing - and who wouldn't? But it reminded me of a childhood friend who always craved attention. We were so different ... but eventually, I didn't need her needing me and learned to avoid those who can't do without it.

I don't understand reverse racism, except that I'm frequently accused of it, being tribal and all. But heck, I left parochial for public school, so I've seen bigotry from both sides and try not to engage.

I specifically asked about Oprah because I wondered if anyone shared my concern about popularity in this campaign season. It's so attractive ... but is an Obama presidency as practical as first blush?

[lapfog_1]

34. No, that's not what you wrote.

in your OP you wrote "my issue"... and

"It's a dream - a lovely dream ... but it rained in the daytime during Camelot and the last time we had small children in the WH, we could be distracted by family antics. This is a presidential candidate who hasn't faced his own teen's rebellion and if anyone is unproven, it's a young dad."

So let's try to parse this...

"it rained in the daytime during Camelot" - by that do you mean that JFK was assassinated in his first term, while his kids were small... and you don't want a repeat? And somehow this is linked in your mind to having small children in the white house?

"the last time we had small children in the WH, we could be distracted by family antics" - so who is distracted here? The public? The Obamas? Who was distracted by Caroline and John, Jr.? The early sixties were a much much different time. But I don't believe that anyone makes the case that JFK was distracted by his children during the Cuban Missile Crises, not that current press secretary for * would even be able to tell you about that bit of history.

"This is a presidential candidate who hasn't faced his own teen's rebellion and if anyone is unproven, it's a young dad." - I don't even know how to respond to that. That's a very loaded and prejudicial statement. Sexist to the max (anyone who is a father of young children is suspect, can't be trusted, may not make the right decisions). If I were to say that Hillary might be unfit to lead because she hasn't faced the issues of Chelsea Clinton's early adulthood, I would be thrown off of this board. And rightly so. So stuff the attitude about Obama is unproven because he has small children. Stuff the attitude that ANYONE would be "unproven" because they are young (he is 46, not especially young, is it?).

As for the rest of your OP, tribal or whatever... that's your trip. I think you are projecting too much.

[Fredda Weinberg]

37. Rained during the daytime in Camelot ... an historical reference, but

not to the assassination, for Pete's sake. Camelot was the administration, fighting itself over civil rights and the Klan. But I remember the popular media ... pictures of Caroline and JFK jr under the desk. My point - and I don't think it's disputable, but you can try - is that the appealing picture hides serious issues we'd rather avoid. I didn't make the case that Kennedy himself was distracted - but you'll find it hard to make a serious case that the public wasn't.

Of course I'm projecting ... my OP began by stating these are my concerns. But it's no trip - participating @ DU is no personal indulgence. If there's a time to make a rational case to counter the hype - speak now.

[lapfog_1]

41. A rational case for WHAT?

Your mind is obviously made up long ago. So any reply is "not intelligent" or "doesn't address the issue" or whatever.

hides serious issues we'd rather avoid? What nonsense is this? If we'd rather avoid them, they will be avoided. Children or no children. Oh look, there is another missing attractive white woman... let's do 24x7 coverage of that!!! Did you know that Britney was taken to the hospital and is under evaluation!!! We don't need small kids or big kids (in many ways, small kids are much LESS distracting than, say, the Bush twins doing a bit of underage drinking and crap) to be distracted. The MSM has many ways to distract the public now. Obama's children will not be a distraction to him or to the public.

As for public distraction about JFK's kids, those were different times. There wasn't much in the way of press and TV was still relatively new. Were his kids distracting us from things... possibly, not as much as you might think. The cover of "Life". But not the lead story of the news every night from Cronkite.

Why does anyone have to "counter the hype"?

I think you've had enough of whatever you started consuming after the caucus last night. Time for bed and a good night's rest. None of the candidates is a lock. Obama had a good night. Deal with it.

BTW, MY candidate went to the sidelines (Joe Biden), and I'm not upset about it at all. Disappointed, but not that upset. It's just the way the cookies crumble.

I did watch the Obama speech last night and thought it was really, really good. And his kids are cute and his wife is stunning. But if I was picking purely on families, I would be picking Edwards right now. Fortunately, that's not how I'm going to choose from the remaining candidates.

Thanks for your "concerns".

[Fredda Weinberg]

51. Edwards has earned the nomination in his own right and I wish him well n/t

[Crunchy Frog]

99. Edwards has earned the nomination?

When did that happen? :shrug:

[Girlieman]

46. Oprah

"I specifically asked about Oprah because I wondered if anyone shared my concern about popularity in this campaign season."

Yeh, big time. As I see it, Oprah is part of the problem, not the solution.

[H2O Man]

18. A repulsive message

[RandomKoolzip]

71. Agreed. This is barely disguised racist flamebait.

It's almost like people are INVENTING reasons not to like a candidate now.

[MADem]

21. Well, I say leave his kids alone.

They look like good kids who do what their parents tell them to do.

In the old days, that would be termed "well behaved." It would be an indicator that they were "raised right."

Take issue with Obama all you want--but hands off the kids, please. That's just Over The Top to even drag them into the discussion at all, unless they did something amusing like puke on George Bush's shoes or something.

After all, Chelsea and The Bush Twins have been permitted to operate under the Bubble of "Kids Are Off-Limits" and these little ones should be afforded the same treatment. It's hard enough being a kid.

I just don't get that last comment. What's his "tribe?" The Fifty-Fifty Club? What does that have to do with Unity, and it making you nervous? Unity to me is a Bloomberg-Obama ticket in the event of Obama's failure to make it on Super Tuesday. Now THAT makes me nervous, but not the fact that the guy has substantial African ancestry and he identifies with that heritage. No one gets upset at Irish people heading for Dublin in the summer, or Italians making the trek to the old province and celebrating the feast of Saint Antony or what have you.

As for Oprah, she's a very loud woman with lots of money. She does what she wants, because she can afford it. Who knows who she'd support were there not an Obama from her home state in the running? All politics is local, and that may have played a role in her decision. If Obama had been a compelling white Senator from IL, we might have seen the same result. We cannot KNOW, of course, because he is what he is, but who cares, really? It's a free country, and Oprah can do whatever the hell she wants. And you can pay attention to her, or ignore her. Your choice.

[Fredda Weinberg]

26. Did anyone accuse the children of anything less? Please, let's

address real issues here. They were visible because their parents put them on stage ... weren't they supposed to be adorable? I didn't see eager, smiling faces ... and that's what got me started on this train of thought that ended with Oprah's involvement. Like progeny of stage parents everywhere, the kids are not the protagonists, nor should they be criticized. But like Oprah's other guests, the Obamas understand show biz.

I worked for NYC a few times over the past years, so a Bloomberg federal administration doesn't make me particularly nervous. He was a Democrat who despised our machine and for personal reasons, so do I. Unfortunately, for reasons I am not at liberty to divulge, I know his intentions are serious.

When I look at compelling senatorial candidates from Illinois, I will always remember unfortunate Nancy Skinner. I'm sure you would have supported her too ... but Obama entered the race and, I don't know about you, but I did contribute toward her campaign debt. So I didn't put him in that category then and see no reason now. You may dismiss the influence of money and media power, but as Jew, I have to find that ... ironic.

[MADem]

69. You "opened" with that issue. That's part of the reason why you're feeling some heat.

Every politician from JFK foreward (despite his wife's protestations) "uses" their kids for the "Awww" factor. And if they are little shits, or bored, or tired, or adorable, it is a reasurring element to voter-parents. Gee, look at our little Bobby, here, he's better behaved than that Matilda on stage there...My little Frederica would NEVER behave like that bratty little child of Justice Roberts!!!

They aren't supposed to be anything but kids, really, and if they're left behind and not included, then the charges of "Bad parents!! Who's watching the children?" come to the fore.

It's just bad form to go after the kids.

I think Bloomberg's intentions are serious, too, and I think he's ready to take Obama on as his VP if Obama doesn't win the Democratic nomination. That was quite possibly the point behind that little "private breakfast in the diner" business.

And I don't "dismiss the influence of money and media power" at all. Bloomberg owns a media outlet, he's richer than twenty Roosevelts, and can buy ads all day and send limos to take his voters to the polls on time if he wants. And not have to worry about CF rules, either.

Politicians with money generally do better than those without (Exception to the rule: Romney, up against Huckabee--the moral to the story there is that no, you actually cannot polish a turd). The Supremes have ruled that Money Is Speech. We vote, in essence, with our campaign contributions, and some people can afford to vote more often than others. Ani DiFranco (who is apparently a singer) has used her clout to support Kucinich at every concert she does, and Kucinich has showed up at most of them. Oprah uses her clout with people who like her schtick to support Obama. Streisand is a Clintonista. Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne are all over John Edwards. It's just how it is. There's no motivation to change it, yet, anyway. The politicians in the maw of the system believe its benefits outweigh the sometimes onerous reporting requirements.

[Fredda Weinberg]

80. For the umpteenth time, I never criticized the kids. Wanting attention

is natural and normal ... but it's a hazard in politicians. I think you're being waaaaaaaay too touchy for what I actually wrote, which was something you can either observe for yourself or not. To disagree and offer your own reaction is polite debate ... to accuse me of bad form for something I didn't do is a tactic.

[MADem]

100. Well, you did. You're trying to backtrack, but you used the word DISTURBING

in describing them. Let's review:

Observing the two girls, I see a disturbing need for attention, a willingness to behave for approval and ... in the younger, none of the polished composure that hides the motivations for everyone on the stage.

Now, if, as you NOW claim, "wanting attention is natural and normal," why did you pull that DISTURBING word out? Natural and normal things are NOT 'disturbing.' Dissonance, anyone?

Sorry. No sale. I'm afraid you tipped your hand there, and you did it all by yourself--so don't go blaming ME for pointing out what YOU did. And no amount of mitigating and counter-accusation is going to gloss that over.

You probably should just retract and shut this down. It's ugly, it's unkind, it's unnecessary and it is out of bounds to go after kids that young.

You can't recover from your 'disturbing' references, even amongst those of us who are not Obama acolytes.

[NoBorders]

23. I'm not that partisan in the primary battles, but

But this ranks up there with one of the silliest, most vapid, and generally ridiculous anti-candidate posts I've seen yet.

He wont' be a good president because he'll be distracted by family antics. Wow. OK.

I was stunned when I realized this wasn't satire. At least I think it isn't. I'll hold out hope that it is.

[Fredda Weinberg]

29. I suppose you missed the subject line. How much is show biz,

how much is an investment in wistful thinking, how much is a racial consciousness that may or may not be healthy for our society?

These are legitimate questions you may or may not choose to engage. But I assure you, there is no malice here.

[NoBorders]

33. Well

OK, sorry to be snotty if you have a substantive question in there. Suffice it to say I don't think the fact that his children are young will be too much of an issue.

[Fredda Weinberg]

36. Agreed. They simply offer evidence of the obvious n/t

[CarbonDate]

28. I'm not really clear what you're getting at.

But I don't really care, either. Good luck getting an answer to your question... whatever it is.

[Fredda Weinberg]

32. You cared enough to post ... negative energy can be exploited

And that's what I'm trying to avoid, but I did want to raise what I consider legitimate concerns. If you don't share them, I bid you peace - it's not my intent to disturb you.

[Torgo Johnson]

30. To quote Dorothy Parker... What fresh hell is this?

I can't believe you are seriously psychoanalyzing two small children. "Polished composure????" She's six years old, for crying out loud!!!.

[Fredda Weinberg]

38. Funny how we read what we want ... not what's there. Nope, there

was no pychoanalyzing from me ... just an observation of spontaneous behavior. I didn't dwell on it, past making the point.

And yes, my post is serious - because glamour matters and glitter obscures more than it highlights. We don't have to be attracted by every shiny object ...

[cali]

40. Perhaps you don't know glitz and glamor from inspiration and

substance. And in case you didn't notice, every person posting on your thread has seen its inanity clearly. YOU are the only person that seems to think you actually said anything with even a shred of substance. You should consider that. You won't.

[Fredda Weinberg]

52. Ah cali, you lack patience. My plans span decades and have never

failed to produce tangible results for everyone concerned. That's substance. My participation here has been constructive, save the time DUers drank the kool air w/she who shall not be named ... but I tried back then, I tried.

Now, I'm not looking after a dying mother anymore. Been negotiating with NYPD since getting my master's and it's fun to offer references from other municipal departments like FDNY.

Inane? Hardly. Racism in the US damages us all and I know ... I can pass. Obama can't - but I grew up in East Flatbush and had an actual African American experience - double dutch and all. Obama's mamma, for good reason, sent him overseas. So I got a shoe in the head after MLK was shot ... yeah, that leaves me touchy.

There are lots of good reasons to hold the position I do. Oprah's contribution, positive and negative, is a legitimate issue as we face New Hampshire. But she takes the risk ... not me. I've been mild and on topic. Again, I ask you to consider your tone and speed to give offense. You don't know me and shouldn't be quick to take anyone on.

[TomClash]

31. Gee, here's a substantive response

I don't really care whether his daughters might misbehave - they can't act much worse than the Bush chicks - and the Kennedy kids behaved pretty well while Jack was alive. What a non-issue.

"LBJ walked in with a portfolio of owed favors" - we all know how that turned out. When FDR was elected he was an economic conservative who became a Keynesian out of circumstance. He also had an overwhelming Dem majority - give any Dem President those advantages and he or she will do fine. FDR's message was for hope and against fear - sound familiar?

Most jews were ecstatic when Lieberman got the VP nod in 2000 - he was one of them and they were proud of it and rightly so. Why can't Dyson feel the same pride?

Who knows or cares whether Oprah would have campaigned for a "white candidate?" She's currently campaigning for one who is "half white" so what do you think the answer is?

Enough African-Americans have voted and campaigned for whites for so long that questions about "supporting whites" don't even deserve to be considered. To vote for John Kerry and Al Gore African-Americans often stood for up to eight hours waiting to vote - with resolve and without complaint. Spend the 2008 working a minority precinct in a close state and see it for yourself.

[Fredda Weinberg]

35. I live in a majority minory district. Quite happily, I might add. Met

everyone on the local police precinct community council, where it matters most. So your lecture is accepted, but misdirected.

I did not claim the Obama children misbehaved. They were children and for that reason alone, interesting to observe for unguarded behavior. I doubt you could dispute that.

I personally benefitted from LBJ's war on poverty, so no ... tell me how I'm supposed to think it turned out. It went well for my refugee family. And I guess we've read different biographies of FDR - anything you care to cite?

I was here, at DU, where Lieberman was nominated. No, you did not have Jews openly embracing him here ... and yes, it was uncomfortable for us. Dyson can feel all the pride he wants, but racial consiousness is a sharp blade that no, we did not wield.

So, you may not care for whom Oprah campaigned, but if it were for issues alone, you might. I won't question your motivations ... if you think you can be "half-white" in America, our experiences seriously differ.

You don't know anything about me, but I have spent enough time "downtown" to be recognized by African Americans in public. Nothing charged me more than to hear ... "it's the computer lady" in LAX. When you can share that with me, I'll accept your rebuke. Until then, my concerns were aired and so far, not responded to in an intelligent manner, though I'll be happy to respond to any valid criticism you might offer. As for historical facts, we can duel references.

[TomClash]

50. Then I don't understand your post - mine was not meant to be a lecture

You seemed to predict Barack's children would misbehave if he took office - "family antics" and "a disturbing need for attention" and "none of the polished composure" and so on.
Are you saying he's a bad father and Michelle is a bad mother? Based on their kids freedom to roam on the stage? Or do you mean something else? Frankly, I don't get it.

The War on Poverty turned out ok, but my family didn't benefit so much from the other War, so maybe our perspectives are different. LBJ's bullshit war resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. If that's what "experience" and favors get you - no thanks.

Jews in NYC pretty much openly embraced Lieberman. DU even now is a small community. Dyson is feeling the same pride Irish Catholics felt in 1960. He's not "wielding a blade" - a peculiar and disturbing comment in and of itself.

Your question was not Barack's skin color and what effect that has on his existence, but rather whether Oprah would campaign for a white person. Barack did have a white mother, so she is willing to campaign for a mulatto candidate. Her audience is predominantly white. Why do you assume she campaigns for Barack only because he is black.

I live "downtown" and am recognized by African-Americans in public and in my office and in my neighborhood and in my home. And they usually don't call me anything but "Tom."

[Fredda Weinberg]

54. Are stage parents bad? I think we need 'em.

LBJ put libraries and specialists in my local public schools as part of the war on poverty.

Jews in NYC expected to be blamed for Gore's defeat ... here's a typical post from outside DU - nd remember, I live here, this is my reality you're trying to deny:

He is, as my grandma would have said, a shonda (a shame) for the Jews, not all of whom are so enamored of Israel’s actions and many of whom (me too) are dreaded liberals.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/07/31/2890/

[TomClash]

72. Two points

Can we agree that LBJ was good domestically and poor internationally?

No nonjew I know would have blame jews for Gore's defeat, had he actually lost. That would have been an absurd position. Lieberman helped Gore win Florida.

I am generally familiar with your position on Israel. That's precisely why I never mentioned Israel in these posts - you don't seem to me to be a knee-jerk Israeli supporter.

[Fredda Weinberg]

81. I try not to be a knee jerk anything, which is why this situation has

bothered me for days.

As for LBJ, yes, we agree. When I studied political economics, the tragedy of guns vs butter was epitomized by the war on poverty competing with Vietnam. We have not yet recovered.

[Blue-Jay]

84. Uh...

"I was here, at DU, where Lieberman was nominated."

Oh really?

About Democratic Underground, LLC

Democratic Underground (DU) was founded on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2001, to protest the illegitimate presidency of George W. Bush and to provide a resource for the exchange and dissemination of liberal and progressive ideas.

[Fredda Weinberg]

89. Forgive me ... you're right. I came here after 2001 ... it was Salon's Table Talk then

That's where I got involved in the Florida central voter file. Thank you for the correction.

[flordehinojos]

42. i see obama as opportunistic and duplicitous. he reminds me of GWB.

guess i won't be flying with the pack of seagulls.

[goldcanyonaz]

45. The Pod People will be coming for you soon enough.

[cali]

49. LOL!

reminds you of bush? Well, you kinda remind me of bush in a round about way: you've contorted youreslf into a pretzel to draw a comparison between bush and Obama. Pretelz remind me of bush.

[flordehinojos]

66. in your estimation, my thinking my have contorted itself to see obama in the way that i do ...

i assure you, keen perception is never contorted ... however, duplicitousness and bush light aspirations do contort themselves.

[Honeycombe8]

47. Oh, puuuhhhhleeeez. The Obama bashing is getting downright silly.

"Observing the two girls, I see a disturbing need for attention, a willingness to behave for approval and...."

I suppose you would need another several hours of psychoanalysis with the kids to determine whether their father is ready to be President?

This is truly getting bizarre. Grasping at straws.

[Fredda Weinberg]

56. I'm saying Obama is a fashion, a fancy ... an appealing fantasy

You don't need a professional to know that Americans buy a brand that appeals ... this will be a campaign about more.

[cali]

61. I'm saying this is your typical pretentious crap

Not to mention condescending, and of course many of your posts in this thread, as always, are all about how great Fredda is.

A fantasy? His record directly contradicts that he's a light weight.

Face it, you've got major problems with your candidate getting roundly defeated in Iowa. Get used to it. Odds are great that she's headed for a fall in NH and beyond. Her desperation is showing and so is yours.

I actually believe that democrats will see through Clinton. They'll see she's willing to do or say anything to win- including playing the Rudy 9/11 card.

[sniffa]

65. in person, it's not much different

but, she can pass. :rofl:

[Fredda Weinberg]

83. Yes, you do hate ... so I won't take it personally.

HRC is my senator and makes me proud. If not this time, she'll have contributed to the process and wait another turn. It says something good about her ... that she could give Kerry a clean shot last time - it must have been awfully tempting to jump in then. But HRC appears to be a good soldier and I respect legitimate authority.

cali, you don't like me but according to the DU rules, you really should keep your anger in check. You've crossed the line several times but you see ... it's not about me at all. I am what the world needs me to be and if that means the Great Fredda - so be it. And if it bothers you, well ... you're going to have a difficult time ahead.

[MadHound]

48. So let me get this straight.

You object to Obama because he has young children and "hasn't faced his own teen's rebellion"?:wtf:

Let me guess, you didn't support Carter either, or Kennedy, etc. But hey, Georgie boy had taken his daughters through their teens, faced their rebellions, and did that really make him a better president? I should think not.

And frankly, the second part of your reason is nothing but disguised racial bigotry.

Until you come up with more substantial reasons for your opposition to Obama, I would suggest that you refrain from posting here. All you're doing is making yourself look like an ass.

[Fredda Weinberg]

59. I waded through 5 feet of snow to vote for Carter. Voted at the

University of Rochester and proud to do so.

So, starting with the obvious fact that you know nothing about me, would you care for civil discourse or abuse? If the latter, you don't belong at DU. I've been a member in good standing for years and look back without personal regrets on our accomplishments.

[MadHound]

98. I'm happy for you, which do you want, a medal or a chest to pin it on?

We can sit here and stack up our creds 'til the cows come home(trust me on that one, while you waded through snow to vote for Carter, I waded through snow getting the vote out for Carter), but that wouldn't achieve a damn thing.

That still doesn't answer is why the hell you think that not having adult kids is some sort of drawback for Obama, nor why you are quoting semi-racial gobbledy-gook as further justification for your position. If you want to discuss this, fine. If not, we can go on our way.

As far as civil discourse vs abuse, I hardly think that I've been abusive towards you. I have not insulted you. I have used strong and descriptive language, and was quite blunt in my comments. If that offends you, oh well. It is the way I am, especially when I'm confronting a poster whose words border on the fantastic, irrational and racist all at once. I've been around here as long as you, if not longer, my ways are acceptable to the mods and others around here. If you can't deal, again, oh well.

But again, that is neither here nor there. You have still refused to answer my original questions, either directly to me or anywhere on this thread. In fact I noticed that you have a disturbing trend in your discourse, whenever somebody even hints at criticizing, in the most polite terms even, your position, you break out all of your supposed accomplishments and creds, as if those by you some leeway. Then you proceed to chew out the poster for imagined offenses and go off in a huff. Thus you are trying to deflect legit criticism. However what you do is not only poor form, but it also shows that you don't have the wherewhithal to defend your position. I understand, it is hard to defend the indefensible, but then why did you take such a position in the first place? I would suggest that you lay off the haughty demure and actually interact with others who are criticizing your position here. Or not, if that suits you also, it makes no difference to me one way or the other. I simply thought I would let you know that I see not just your positions for the garbage they are, but also your posting plays for the sad front that they are also.

Oh, and Hillary lost, Obama won, get over it.

Peace:hi:

[ecstatic]

53. Your post makes no sense, except you reveal your true thoughts

at the very end: Would Oprah have campaigned for a white candidate?

Your question is insulting. It just goes to show that no matter what a black person does in his/her life, so many Americans will continue to question the legitimacy of everything s/he does. Why is this only an issue to you when it's a black person endorsing another black? Do you have a problem when white people endorse Edwards or Clinton?

[Fredda Weinberg]

58. You assume I'm white ... sorry, but that ain't the case here. I can pass

but when I dress the way I was raised ... put it this way, I faced worse than Obama ever did.

When we were young, we moved from East Flatbush and its rising crime rate to Sheepshead Bay, an Italian neighborhood. My oldest brother suffered worse, but together were surrounded and taunted ... I learned to stand my ground and watch bullies skulk off in defeat.

So please ... ethnic consciousness can be a force for good or ill. It doesn't advance the argument to be insulted by concerns based on false assumptions.

As for what white people do ... the best thing about Edwards, Gore and Clinton is that southern gentlemen agreed to work together. It was a politically winning combination while it totally excluded the African American base of the Democratic party. Instead of complaining, I spent a decade trying to undo damage. Yes, it is a problem.

[sniffa]

64. pfft!!

:rofl:

being white as milk is not the ability to pass. and no, you don't get a ghetto pass either.

this thread is awesome. :thumbsup:

[Fredda Weinberg]

77. I don't need a pass from you ... I've walked the walk

and have commendations and offical citations to show for it.

[sniffa]

85. i had no idea

you should brag about that more often. :thumbsup:

[Fredda Weinberg]

86. Don't need to. Working on next chapter ... n/t

[sniffa]

87. you shouldn't be so modest

:thumbsup:

[Fredda Weinberg]

91. I wish I could be. After my mother passed away, while the hospice

nurse was still there, I held the bottle of morphine and made a decision: I had accomplished the purpose for which I'd been conceived to everyone's satisfaction and I could move on.

Or not. At that moment, I became responsible for what I've done. Everything I'd suffered @ DU until that point became meaningless and I was liberated. It took a while ... grad school, getting back w/cops, but yeah ... I'm being what the world needs me to be again and even without da Momma, a formidable force indeed, we're seeing progress in our lifetime. My family is content.

Now, the country is in turmoil ... you appear to be in personal pain. But I have no desire to hurt you, honestly, so if any offense was taken, I apologize. None is meant.

[sniffa]

92. Seriously, you shouldn't be so modest

:thumbsup:

[Fredda Weinberg]

95. merci and au revoir n/t

[bigwillq]

55. Leave the kids alone.

But go ahead and criticize the wife all you want. She deserves it.

[Fredda Weinberg]

57. I wish that were so, but when Rudy's son acted out on stage, it was

noticed. So, you can't say candidate's children, when presented in public ... are a private matter. I wasn't peeking into bedrooms.

Besides, I wasn't criticizing anyone. Some people crave attention, that's all. My legitimate concern is whether this candidate works well with others ... running as a freshman is not a good sign.

So I looked at his victory speech, to see if I should worry. And from what I saw on stage, from everyone there, concerned me. If you don't share it, by all means have a great day.

[bigwillq]

68. But Obama's kids are little

to me that's a different story.

[Fredda Weinberg]

75. Rudy's Andrew was elementary grade ... 8, if I recall or thereabouts

It's just the way things have always been. But again, I have no criticism for the Obama girls ... I would have been delighted if they'd looked happy.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

67. But what if Hillary has pets in the White House?

It could happen. Just imagine she gets a dog or a pair of cats or a large Habitrail system with hamsters. Then all the attention is on the pets and they get underfoot and the Secretary of State gets distracted by their antics and oops, there goes the Korean Peninsula. I think it could be a problem, and I somehow hadn't even considered it before I read your post. Thank you.

[MADem]

70. That Secretary of State had better wear sensible shoes if there's a Habitrail involved.

The Condi-esque stilettos could do real damage to a loose hamster...

[Whisp]

73. good to see your clock being cleaned in this thread.

what a sick puppy post.
There is something terribly wrong with you.

[Fredda Weinberg]

74. You wish. It's actually the debate I wanted to start ... it has nothing

to do with me, except your anger comes from somewhere ... in your soul. Have a great one, cause there's nothing wrong w/my day.

[Whisp]

104. talk about need for attention and motivations....

""Observing CERTAIN POSTERS, I see a disturbing need for attention, a willingness to behave for approval and ... in SOME, none of the polished composure that hides the motivations for everyone on the stage."""

:rofl:

[killbotfactory]

79. Dr. Frist? Is that you?

[SOS]

88. Obama's kids?

"a disturbing need for attention, a willingness to behave for approval and ... in the younger, none of the polished composure that hides the motivations for everyone on the stage."

Malia Ann is 8
Sasha is 6

You want "polished composure" from a 6 year-old to "hide the motivations" of her parents?!
Given that Obama's motivation is to win the Presidency, how and why do you suggest that his 6 year-old daughter hide that?

Was Carter "distracted" by Amy? Was Clinton "distracted" by Chelsea? Was Kennedy unable to handle the Cuban Missile Crisis because John and Caroline were in the vicinity?

And why is Barbara Streisand campaigning for Clinton? They're both white!

[Fredda Weinberg]

90. Amazing what editing will do. I was describing the family and you

cut it and pasted it next to the kids. Clever, but you think I can't remember what I wrote?

Seriously, Sasha and her sister Malia Ann should enjoy long and happy lives. 'nuff said.

[SOS]

93. What amazing editing are you talking about?

I simply copied the first line of your OP.
That's not editing, it's a quote.

Here's your description of the family again, unedited:

"Observing the two girls, I see a disturbing need for attention, a willingness to behave for approval and ... in the younger, none of the polished composure that hides the motivations for everyone on the stage."

Remember that?

[Fredda Weinberg]

94. It was your edit ... sarcasm aside. But thank you for putting in the

whole sentence, where you will not find any expectation for a 6 year old to be anything but natural. Everything is your problem, not mine.

[Anouka]

105. Thank you, SOS.

The OP's original message is crap. Why are people doing this?

[redwitch]

96. People really should not post here while under the influence

of stupidity, drugs, or racism. It is happening way too much lately for my liking.

"Observing the two girls, I see a disturbing need for attention, a willingness to behave for approval and ... in the younger, none of the polished composure that hides the motivations for everyone on the stage." WTF does that even mean?????

[sniffa]

97. i have a feeling she's going to respond

but it may take a while to type it. might want to go grab a snack.

[medeak]

103. what phase is the moon in?

as the Britney Spears of the world are coming out...think have been away too long..who IS this person?