Obama not ready to lead and protect us from day 1.

But that's not the point, look at what he's accomplished by trying ? One of these three is going to be the next President of the USA. It's a $ 400K/year sweepstakes. Jimmy Carter for all intents and purposes is thought of as the worst, but that doesn't stop him from cashing in that Presidential pension every year, does it ? Like Kerry, Obama, the poor bastard, he'll only go back to a congressional paycheck in the event he loses. Then maybe in 2012, he runs again ?

Sweepstake? USD 400,000!

Even the mayor of San Francisco makes more!

Try a $200 million "exit package" for a CEO who ran his Fortune 500 company to the ground: now THAT's a sweepstake!

an original campaign idea?

name one original idea that has ever come from ANY political candidate. Historically don't they all campaign on the same issues?

economy
abortion
gay marriage
israel
health care
foreign policy (whether we're at war or not at war)
economy
economy

Hillary's original campaign idea is to borrow the same strategy from the New Deal - we'll all pay in to it?

That's a new idea?

McCain is keeping us safer, right? How by blocking a contract with Boeing that would create 40,000 jobs here in the US and letting another company win it that outsourced a portion of the jobs to another country???

See this is what I mean by experience and naieve accusations, when you consider the source and their f'ups and failures, I don't see experience as being something they have as a positive.

Point taken... but at least people in Congress would pay attention to what's going on in the White House. The worst thing I see happening with Obama in office would be a bunch of people smiling in his face as if everything is fine, then turn around and ignore him like he's some kind of inexperienced flash in the pan. Paraphrasing one of my favorite quotes from the MLK episode of "The Boondocks", sometimes people need to get mad in order to make things happen. Clinton infuriates people for some reason and nothing brings forth any kind of revolution (good or bad) without that kind of energy. Obama, as great a candidate he can be, brings forth some kind of uneasy complatency with me. And if people get too relaxed, they'll also get lazy in the process.

And to compare Clinton to George Bush is ridiculous. We can play six degrees of separation to Dubbya with anyone of these candidates. Every politician lies. Every politician tells half truths or distorts issues in order to candy coat them. But not every issue with the Clinton Administration has had such a negative impact on the United States as the ones in the Bush Campaign. Like Domisoldo said earlier in this thread, the way some people hate Clinton (Republicans AND Democrats) you'd think that she's even worse than George Bush. But compare the successes between the two camps and you'd see that there is no rational reason for thinking that way besides being old names in office.

...and once again Barack "Teflon" Obama eludes the real question: what he would DO to make the US of A better.

I am hardly an Obama detractor. I couldn't care less about his middle name (unless it's Teflon), his drug use (I hope he had fun) and his cute African photograph.

I do care deeply that hordes of people simply swoon at the sound of "hope" and "change" and "yes we can" without any demands for evidence or observation of his past behavior in the US Senate...where he did so very little to bridge the chism between Blues and Reds.

EXACTLY MY POINT! Nothing Obama says is original,,,its the same old crap wrapped in the promise of "change" yawn,,.,,wow hes young and pretty and has "new ideas" lol.....

People listen to slogans and talking points, Domisoldo. This goes both ways. Barack's positions and opinions are clearly laid out online and elsewhere for people who wish to research and find them. He's also discussed them in detail during various debates and interviews. Most people aren't motivated to look up the details themselves, and lack the attention span to absorb the information when it's spoken on TV and not repeated 200 times a day. The information is THERE if you want to go looking for it.

However, that's irrelevant to many Obama supporters who cling to the simple message of hope and change.

It's also irrelevant to people like you who cling to the simple message of Obama's detractors that say he has no experience or no plan.

Both of these are oversimplifications, and you're as guilty of accepting the soundbyte you wish to cling to as the people you are criticizing are of accepting the soundbyte they wish to cling to.

Okay if Obama gets the nomination, just wait for the radical/liberal black wing of the democratic party to step up and demand some recognition from him. So far Obama has played the "middle road" and avoided the likes of Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson for fear of alienating the white support he gets. Once the media coverage of this breaks watch his support slide.

The saddest thing about all of this is how I can visualize how perfect a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket would be for the Democratic ticket for President & VP. Their views on the issues are close in nature, plus we'd potentially be getting the best of both worlds. New eyes, with experience looking over it and actually SUPPORTING it.

But at this point, I'm afraid it'll never happen.

The [hypothetical] media coverage of what, exactly [and hypothetically]? Shapton and Jackson demanding preferential treatment and Obama giving them reasonable and even-handed answers?

I am really touched by your patronizing. Who is "oversimplifying" here?

I have read Obama's "plan" who, as he very publicly stressed in nationally televised debates, hardly differs from Hillary Clinton's. There is absolutely nothing novel in his plan for Health Care, Education, Business, etc.

His plan, as Hillary's, is all about orthodox, liberal policy of the past.

My point was that his claim to the presidency, as he again stressed in televised debates, hinges on his purported ability to unite.

So my question is fair: what has he done in his 3 years in the US Senate to bridge the gap between Republicans and Democrats.

GOP (who are the other side he claims to build bridges to) have already cried fool.

But you're on that KookAid too so my posts are not directed at you.

No,,its going to happen. Some sort of meeting with the likes of Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson will occur after and if he is nominated. He will give them even handed answers? LOL There are going to be demands that his naivety will soon will not be able to handle. And they may not get preferential treatment, but the mere fact that he is seen meeting or negotiating with them will seem that they are getting preferential treatment and the baggage of the radical/liberal baggage of past black candidates will surface, and white middle of the road support he has now will erode.

One thing that I am most interested in seeing is what the media will do once he is the democratic nominee? It is obvious to anyone who can see that they have treated him with kid gloves while trying to make Hillary into a demon. This cannot last in a general campaign so that is when things will get really interesting really fast

Having little difference from someone else's plan is not the same as having no plan at all. YOU said that he had no plan. YOU are oversimplifying. You're also now changing your question to be something else. Like GWB after we found no WMDs in Iraq saying "it's not about the WMDs!" Asshole.

A clear post ... did you get a tutor?
Sumpin's workin'.