RateItAll: The Opinion Network

So everybody thinks that graduating magna cum laude from college, going to Harford college, and being an excellent speaker are all great qualifications for being president? Call me old fashion but I'm going more for the leadership from past experiences, knowledge in economics, and the overall best interest for our country when I will select a president this November. Perseverance, flexibility, and determination is what got me through college to graduate magna cum laude also. I give speeches everyday as part of my job as a teacher. Obama is a fantastic speaker, but he is promising the people unrealistic changes. The things he is proposing right now will take time and even elected another term of presidency he would probably still not get around to carry through with it. We are such a diverse country that there will be many people upset with whom ever wins the election this November. The smart thing to do is to just support which ever candidate wins. Protesting gets you no where. I know there is this thing called "Freedom of Speech" well face it, NOBODY wants to hear anybody complain on end about what someone said or did. The real issue here is that not everything in life is fair and everybody does not get what they want all the time. That's when those three words that I mentioned earlier come it: Determination, flexibility, & Perseverance.

I am very proud to say I cast my vote for Barack Obama in the Democratic primary back in January, and I anticipate voting for him in November. It's time we had a consensus-builder in the White House. I'm not saying he's perfect, but I think he would be a nice change from the selfishness, cynicism, and outright dishonesty of the Bush years.

"Make sure your kids know how to speak Spanish"

What the hell is that supposed to mean? What if I dont want my kid to speak spanish. This is AMERICA. Why dont immigrants learn english? Obama is a smart man, doesnt mean he's fit to be president.

Like his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton, Obama is a center/right, corporate capitalist, establishment candidate.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060626/sirota

Unlike John McCain (an extreme rightwing, corporate capitalist, establishment candidate), Obama doesn't promise to continue the failed policies of the Bush administration.

http://therealmccain.com/

UPDATE:

False hope? http://www.youtube.com/v/-ky8Hvq-F0U&rel=1

UPDATE:

Friends who live there tell me Obama's a typical Chicago politician.

he is likeable and intelligent, but he lacks the experience or maturity to be commander in chief of a nation at war.

i think is fab and we want a new fresh face

the best

Obama is a media creation, someone fueled from the beginning by fawning reporters and commentaries, drooling about the possibility of a black president. I ask you to look beyond race for once.

If Hillary gets the support of Latinos (64 for-32 against) and women (55-60%), it's front page news. Barack gets 80-90% of black votes, and there is fewer said about that. The media is intent on making it seem like Hillary gets the votes because of race/sex, while Obama because of his ability.

Sounds like more phony baloney to me.

The truth is, Obama knows nothing about running a country. And if I want to listen to oratory, I go to a preacher.

Barack Obama is a liberal, and a far left one at that. It amazes me that some people here think they can successfully paint him as a centrist, much less someone that leans to the right. Spending a little more time checking Obama's actual voting record and less time cruising cheap websites is helpful in knowing this.

I thought Bill Clinton would have made a good used car dealer, but Obama puts him to shame. He's the kind of candidate that could sell snow cones to Eskimos, give them a cup of flavorless ice, and have them walk away smiling. His one slip, in my opinion, is trying to sell the fact that he lived abroad before he hit puberty as foreign policy experience. Of course, the mainstream media swept it under the rug. Using this logic the fact that I had one of those pedal cars when I was a kid should qualify me for the Daytona 500. See you at the finish line.

How about some straight talk, leadership and experience should be the top two qualifications to become U.S. President. Obama has neither, and for the record, he is a stone Liberal. Fit's been reading too many left wing web sites.
Try these instead...

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/01/national_journal_obama_most_li.html
http://www.nypost.com/seven/12122006/news/nationalnews/barackground_info_nationalnews_ian_bishop.htm
http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=BS030017

lunamix, you're raciest. Waht's wrong with muslims?
anyway, if he is really a true muslim, that will be good for all americans.

Islam, isn't as what your government and its media teach you!

Do you know what the translation of the word Islam? of course you don't.
It means PEACE.
so, please control yourself before writting such things about Islam or any other religions.

Born a muslim, raised a muslim. A muslim is always a muslim according to the qurran (koran)! Rioting in the streets regardless of the political outcome. Will legalize drugs. Will release convicts and empty jails.

I voted for Obama in the California Super Tuesday Primary. When I woke up this morning, I still didn't know who I was going to vote for. What pushed me over the edge was an article I read in the Economist detailing some of the Clinton machine's thuggish campaigning, and Bill's attempt to make the election about him.

I have doubts about Obama's experience and toughness, but there's no doubting his talent. Anybody who looks at his record can have no doubt - the man is supremely talented, and seems to inspire others like few other politicians in our generation. To come from nothing to be editor of the Harvard Law Review, and then to the pinnacle of American politics is absolutely an embodiment of the American dream. Whether or not you feel he is ready to be president, how can you not be impressed by this man.

I'm tired of the Clinton / Bush partisan wars, and it's time to move on. Obama has been hammering the message of post partisanship, and it's one that I feel pretty strongly about.

As an independent, I considered voting on the Republican ticket - but I feel that McCain has CA pretty much wrapped up. My vote carries more weight on the Democratic side.

Whoever emerges from today as the favorites from their respective party, we are going to see a substantial improvement over our current leadership. I couldn't be happier with the choices of Romney / McCain / Clinton / Obama - they're all talented, and they all bring something unique to the table.

Obamas just plain awsome!

Obama is running to establish himself as a household name for the next time he decides to run. I think it's fairly clear that he won't be the nominee. He has some support, but the party establishment isn't behind him. He has raised some money from the grass-roots, but the big money is behind Hillary. She will likely be the nominee. Obama is not without his political talents, but Hillary operation on the ground is clearly superior. She can owe that to her husband's 8 years in the White House. That gives her an advantage in many things, from dealing with candidate forums to raising money. Obama will score a second place win in the national polls and possibly a win in South Carolina. But he will have to wait his turn.

First, I want a President who's a lot smarter than most of us. Barack Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard law school, arguably the best law school in the nation. The highest honor one can achieve in law school is not only to be among the elite few to be selected for the law review (a scholarly journal focusing on legal issues), but to be elected its editor-in-chief. He was the first black ever to do so. Got his B.A. from Columbia, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations. He was a lecturer of constitutional law at the U. of Chicago Law School, another of the best law schools in the U.S., from 1993 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004.

Second, I want a President with outstanding character and morality (for a change). Obama strikes me as a guy who who has just that, and I've read nothing but good things about him in that respect. Third, while executive experience is a plus, it's not a necessity. Abraham Lincoln and JFK did just fine for not having previously been political executives. I think Obama has demonstrated he can manage political campaigns and his U.S. and state senate offices well, and there's no reason to think he couldn't manage well as President. The staff Obama recruited for his Senate office were "considered exceptional for a first-term incoming senator." Wikipedia, Barack Obama. Finally, I want a President who has acted on his beliefs, not just talked about them. For only having been in the U.S. Senate (nearly) four years, Obama's accomplishments are impressive; see the Wikipedia article. For his stances on the major issues, see Issues.

He's a strategic thinker and very analytical. In the fall of 2002, before the start of the Iraq War, he was extraordinarily prescient in saying "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. 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."

Some reviewers have stated he wants to "invade" Pakistan. That's BS; he wants Pakistan as an ally. The one out-of-context sentence of Obama's seized upon by some reviewers was: "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets [in the mountains of Pakistan] and President Musharraf won’t act, we will." For the actual text of that speech, see it here. Here are the pertinent parts of the speech:
"[Our] security is most threatened by the al-Qaeda and Taliban sanctuary in the tribal regions of northwest Pakistan. Al-Qaeda terrorists train, travel, and maintain global communications in this safe-haven. The Taliban pursues a hit and run strategy, striking in Afghanistan, then skulking across the border to safety. . . . There must be no safe-haven for terrorists who threaten America. . . . I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will. . . . We must help Pakistan invest in the provinces along the Afghan border, so that the extremists’ program of hate is met with one of hope."

Suggested we invade Pakistan to get the Taliban. Let's see, Pakistan is an ally and has nuclear weapons. Nice touch OBomber. Now, if he'll only go after the French and the Free Peoples Republic of Cambridge, MA my vote is his...

His neo-con foreign policy would be awfully horrible for America.

I don't know for sure if it's the dumbest thing said from thes candidates,but I gotta make my number one contender for bs that caught my attention-Obama's comment regarding the Virginia Tech massacre,putting it in a category with outsourcing and Don Imus.I guess Warren Buffett doesn't have enough money.

With Warren Buffett hosting a fundraiser for Obama night last, and other billionaires coming to his side, Obama's credibility is on the rise. Once he learns a few good lines about foreign relations, he'll be set; no deep knowledge is necessary (vide Bush, who despite being a megamillionaire hadn't even been to Europe until a couple of years ago!). In some ways Obama would mark a truer return to Clintonian politics than Hillary herself: Obama doesn't draw intense dislike from anyone yet, and is very able at being everyone to everybody, which, far from being a sign of inauthenticity, is what most of us looking for some national unity need. As even the speculative side of our economy tanks, and angry billionaires-turned-mere-megamillionaires vow to defeat the GOP, Obama's Clinton impersonation looks better and better. I'm hardly in the wealthy class, but having lost about sixth of my IRA in the last couple of weeks, I see where the financiers' anti-GOP sentiments are coming from. I really feel for the people who are twice my age, and will now have to work many more years than they had expected....

I'll be glad to see my fellow African to be at the top notch of American presidency.
I believe he'll perform as equal or better than his American white counterparts.

Ishmael, from Ghana

Charm and charisma is great, he can make a very eloquent speach and drive it home. But quite frankly I haven't seen any leadership qualifications demonstrated. He's got a premature resume to be running for president, although next to George Bush he looks pretty damn good.

He is the glamour candidate, but is untested. He didn't have much competition when he ran for senate and has not been subjected to the political rough and tumble. Will he fall apart as so many newbies have in the past?

I've got a "wait-and-see" attitude about this one.

why do people even listen to Oprah Winfrey. Why is she paid ridiculous millions of mega bucks? I see nothing to her. But she acted well in "The Color Purple."

If Obama is to be critiqued for (allegedly) not answering a question directly, then his critics would have a field-day with the present administration. . .and leftists aren't thrilled with Obama's true centrist belief in civil unions instead of 'gay marriage'. . .Barack is called left by many, but a clever centrist by others. . .the "liberal media" won't let the issue of inexperience die as if experience in Washington is actually worth a bucket of hamster-vomit. . .Obama won't win because he's too bright, articulate, and doesn't appeal to voters who don't like being told that major changes are necessary. . .America still likes fantasies and being rocked-to-sleep about health care, the economy, and our standing in the world. . .

So he joined a Christian church 19 years ago at the age of 27. Did his political career begin about then, also? And what denomination did he espouse from age 8 until 27? With most presidential candidates, if you don't (or can't) answer a question forthrightly, it looks like you're hiding something, unless the press is in your pocket.

I don't want to imply that he's got a thin resume, and I'm desperately trying to avoid calling him a "dark horse"candidate, but questions like this will continue to fly until they are answered. Speaking of liberal bias, are there any news organizations treating Obama with anything resembling the "objectivity" that Newt Gingrich receives? Any? Not a single one? By mid-2008, his comically liberal voting record in the Senate will be acknowledged even by the most staunch liberal democrats. It will be over soon thereafter.

Why has Obama's religion not been discussed like Mitt Romney's? If Obama is elected will he swear in on the Koran?

Barak is typical of today's liberals; he votes along very liberal, socialistic, lines, but tries to portray himself as moderate to conservative in the press.

At this point in time it is too early to say he would be a good candidate for president. The experience factor may hurt him (if anything does) but at this point George Bush makes Obama look like George Washington.