Obama is CLEARLY doing well - otherwise, why would so many people be WHINING?

[UrbScotty]

This incessant whining about Barack Obama has led me top one conclusion: He’s doing well.

Obama, it seems, is currently the brunt of the most attacks. Why? Just what do so many people resent about Barack Obama?

Is it his progressive stances on issues?

Is it the fact that he opposed the war from the beginning, unlike Edwards and Hillary?

Maybe it’s the fact that Clinton and Edwards agree with him on Pakistan.

Or maybe it’s his desire for change - not just a change in policy, but a fundamental change - in the way business is done in Washington. Put siomply, he's a threat to some people's tired old ways of thinking.

I don’t know what it is some people despise about Obama, but I’ll tell you one thing - the more some people baselessly attack him, the more I like him.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

1. Once again an Obama fan invokes the IWR to attack Edwards and Hillary...

Yet we dare not even question *HIM* on the IWR. :crazy:

==Is it his progressive stances on issues?==

He is identical to HRC on the issues. If you disagree, name one policy difference between the two, aside from merit pay on which Obama is more conservative than the other Democratic candidates.

==Or maybe it’s his desire for change - not just a change in policy, but a fundamental change - in the way business is done in Washington.==

Politicians, including the likes of John McCain, George W. Bush (where do you think the themes of "unity" and "new kind of politics" come from? Rove!), and Joe Lieberman, have long called for a "new kind of politics" that magically goes beyond partisanship. Guess what? It has never happened in 200+ years. I doubt any of them actually believe they can magically do what no one has been able to do since Lexington and Concord but they know it polls well.

[UrbScotty]

7. Well...

"Yet we dare not even question *HIM* on the IWR." - You're right; How DARE we lket him off easy for opposing it when he was just a state senator! :sarcasm:

"He is identical to HRC on the issues." Uh, hello???? You have to have been sleeping under a rock with regard to the 'to-meet-or-not-to-meet-with-dictators' issue? And then there is the issue of Iraq.

"Politicians... have long called for a "new kind of politics" that magically goes beyond partisanship." So is Edwards; why should we trust him?

[jillan]

2. This is why I'm whining:

Pakistani protesters burn a U.S. flag to condemn U.S. presidential hopeful Barack Obama's remarks, in Karachi, Pakistan, Friday. Pakistan criticized Obama for saying that, if elected, he might order unilateral military strikes inside this Islamic nation to root out terrorists.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-08-03-pakistan-obama_N.htm

[UrbScotty]

8. What, did Pakistan LIKE the US before this week?

:eyesroll:

Puh-leez.

[jillan]

13. And it's a really great idea to piss them off more!

right?!

[UrbScotty]

16. Then why should we nominate Hillary or Edwards?

Like I said, they agree with Obama. They would surely piss off Pakistan as much as Obama.

[jobycom]

3. By that logic, Bush and Cheney are doing stellar. nt

[oakleaf]

4. Agreed

Even they aren't ridiculous enough to invade Pakistan.

[UrbScotty]

9. You two prove my point.

You have to resort to baseless attacks, rooted in passion, rather than on facts.

[PurityOfEssence]

5. News flash: some people are actually concerned about policy.

Statements like this generally come from people whose only concern is with being on the triumphal bandwagon; they can't conceive of criticizing an opponent unless that person is endangering their sad and tortured need to be on the winning side.

How's that for passive-aggressive sideswiping? That IS the established mode of this thread, isn't it?

Some of us are disgusted and scared by blythe pronouncements of military incursion into the territory of an ally, and we're additionally disturbed by dismissals of such dangerous statements as not justifying any real worry. Heaping changing interpretations only fans the flames. Outrage at being challenged for such recklessness throws more logs on the fire, and craven bleats of victimhood just bring out the marshmallows and gasoline.

It's also a tad disconcerting to hear contradictory and similarly casual broad-strokes pronouncements about the use of nuclear weapons. Scratch that, it's REALLY disconcerting.

Consider it an inherent human flaw: so many of us have it that it can't really be termed an aberration.

[Zensea]

6. Exhibit A -- your post

Who is whining - Obama supporters or Obama non-supporters?

[UrbScotty]

12. Saying that someone must be doing well is NOT whining.

I mean, last time I checked.

[Forkboy]

10. No corrollary between the whining level and Obama's success and/or failure.

[AtomicKitten]

11. whining? sniveling? predictions? oaths?

smells like primary season to me

[ChiciB1]

14. What You Just Stated Could Apply to Each One Of The Three Front Runners!

It's only matters when it's your candidate who is getting bashed! It's sick and mean and disgusting! And most of the stuff seems lame for the most part.

No wonder Democrats seem discombobulated, UNITY is sorely lacking!

[illinoisprogressive]

15. he threatens the power of those responsible for the biggest foreign policy disaster

[Clintonista2]

17. For every post "whining" about Obama, you have 15 posts whining about Hillary. NT.