BS: Popular Views on Obama

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:35 PM

From the Washington Post:

This brings us to Exhibit B, which is, you may have guessed, Obama. He got the good-policy merit badge for resisting peer pressure (McCain plus Hillary Clinton) for a gas tax holiday. He would spend $150 billion over 10 years, far more than McCain would, to promote alternative sources of energy. So far, so good.

But the Obama campaign has taken a decided turn toward the less responsible in the past week. I'm not talking about his evolution on drilling. However poll-driven, this is eminently sensible: He's not itching for more but willing to consider it in certain areas as part of a broader, bipartisan compromise.

The same can't be said for his deja-vu-all-over-again proposal to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (see Al Gore 2000, John Kerry 2004), or for his $1,000-per-family "energy rebate," a whopping $65 billion cost to be paid for with a windfall-profits tax. Just a month ago, Obama was saying that there was no need to tap the reserve and that such a move should be saved for a "genuine emergency." Oil was more than $140 a barrel then. It's less than $120 a barrel now. What's changed, except for the better? Still, as gimmicks go, tapping the reserve is a more effective one than a gas tax holiday.

As for a windfall-profits tax, if you want to produce more energy, it hardly makes sense to give oil companies less incentive to make investments. Nor does it make sense to tax companies because market conditions boost their profits -- any more than homeowners and shareholders should be penalized for selling during a boom.

Obama, too, has descended to misleading. He accuses McCain of wanting to give $4 billion in tax breaks to oil companies -- without mentioning that this is no special oil-only deal, just part of McCain's proposal for an overall reduction in the corporate tax rate, something Obama has said he'd consider. Does that put him in the pocket of Big Oil, too?

And another question: If this is the state of the discussion in August, what will October bring?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:46 PM

>>>From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 11:50 AM

Yes, we are tired of hearing about him. I'm glad I'm not the only one. Personally, I'm tired of hearing him, period.<<<

I'm not going to call you a liar. But I feel compelled to point out some cognitive dissonance on your part. Perhaps I should just offer a little loving advice. If you personally and actually are tired of the subject of Obama, I would advise a very simple thing. Avoid threads on the Mudcat with his name in them. I estimate that alone will cut your Obama news consumption by at least twenty percent.

Its not a cure mind you, but it might get you through until November.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:54 PM

Well, I can sympathize. THis is a trying time, and to be honest, I am not only tired of hearing about McCain, Obama, Hillary, and several others, I am also tired of hearing about Bush, Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, and several others..

Not because I am disinterested in the state and progress of the Union, but because all the easily available information out there is so skewed, colored, misrepresented, and punched out of shape by the carriers thereof. Just think what it woudl be like if there were a free and independent press dedicated tot he Jeffersonian ideal of a well-informed populace. Why, it would be truly awe-inspiring.

BTW that Lame Cherry Blog has got to be one of the most wildly illiterate and ignorant screeds ever to waste an electron or two.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:36 PM

I note, however, Amos, that you are not tired of hearing about Chongo.

Eh? How about that, eh?

THAT, my friend, is why he's going to win.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 03:03 PM

Not so fast Little Hawk!

Its true that Chongo has not had the exposure of some others, he also doesn't seem to bear up to it as well. I think that the more we see of Chongo, the more the "tiredness" gap will grow.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 03:14 PM

That's possible, Jack, I'll grant you that. What really concerns me is Paris Hilton's entry into the race. That's serious.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:49 PM

Actually, I didn't mention being tired of hearing about Chongo because it is an aching, cursed constant; I have been tired of hearing of him ever since we had to rescue Chinga from that B-class bar on the Grand Canary waterfront where he had abandoned her to go jump a freighter to America.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:56 PM

LOL! Poke the sleeping badger and the result is guaranteed...

Very well, Amos. Very well.

But what about that Paris Hilton, eh? Now there's a fresh new face on the political scene.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 05:20 PM

She'd have to lie about her age, but if Bush can have documents forged to justify Iraq, the precedent has been set.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 06:10 PM

I saw someone ask Boone if he was against drilling. he said "Oh no, we need to do all of it"

His statement about "can't drill our way out" means drilling alone will not get us out of this crisis.

Wolf Blitzer: "What about drilling offshore? There's a debate, as you know, McCain says, 'yes, go ahead and drill off the coast of Florida and California.' Obama says, 'No.' You're an oil man. What do you say?"

T. Boone Pickens: "OK. McCain says, 'OK off the east and west coast.' I say east, west coast and ANWR—get it all! To get off of foreign oil, that is the enemy...You're drilling and whatever you are able to find and put into the domestic system will help us."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 06:56 PM

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_work_claim.html

"He passed a law to move people from welfare to work, slashed the rolls by eighty percent. Passed tax cuts for workers; health care for kids."

The first bill that's cited is the 1997 law that created the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program in Illinois. The ad claims Obama "passed a law to move people from welfare to work, slashed the rolls by 80 percent." That's going too far. First, the law in question wasn't dreamed up out of thin air by its sponsors. It was the follow-up to the welfare reform act, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, that President Clinton signed on Aug. 26, 1996. That law gave states the ability to design their own welfare programs as long as they met certain federal requirements, including limits on how long recipients could get benefits. The bill that Obama cosponsored was Illinois' version.

And far from having "passed" the bill single-handedly, Obama was among five Senate sponsors of the measure, as we said previously. It was passed by both chambers of the Illinois Legislature and signed into law by the governor.

Welfare reform was successful in moving people off public assistance. There was about a 78 percent drop in the number of families receiving public assistance in Illinois between 1998 and 2006. But we don't think Obama alone, or even Obama and the four other sponsors of the Illinois law, can take credit for all of this. It was the federal law, hammered out by Clinton and the Republican Congress, that set the wheels in motion and forced states to act. Nationwide, the number of families on welfare declined quite a bit as well, going from 3,146,870 in '98 to 1,805,900 in '06, a decrease of almost 43 percent.

Also, our friends at PolitiFact talked to an expert who said part of the steep drop in Illinois' numbers was due to other factors, such as a state bureaucracy that took an aggressive approach to ejecting people from the rolls, sometimes erroneously.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Emma B
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:17 PM

'Its true that Chongo has not had the exposure of some others, he also doesn't seem to bare up to it as well. I think that the more we see of Chongo.......'

well I kinda think this is more 'exposure' tham we need :)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:20 PM

Sawzaw,

He said that we can't drill our way out of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 05:42 PM

Why not just drill everywhere? After all, they haven't tried drilling for oil yet in the White House lawn, have they? And why NOT, I ask you???

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 05:50 PM

It would violate Homeland Security to drill everywhere, obviously. Haven't you read the Patriot Act? Or do you hate freedom, too?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 06:05 PM

In a mood for grilling people, are we?

No, I just hate other people's expressions of freedom when it interferes directly with my own preferred agenda. ;-) I think this is a universal human (and animal) problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 06:30 PM

Carol had her teeth drilled yesterday. They didn't find any oil, so we'll just have to keep inflating our tires.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 07:32 PM

That is very true JTS I never said he did not say that. He did not say he we should not drill or that he was against drilling. My interpretaion was that drilling alone will not solve the crisis and it won't.

He did say "You're drilling and whatever you are able to find and put into the domestic system will help us." which indicates to me that he is for drilling.

The skeleton in Obama's money closet
By Judi McLeod Thursday, July 24, 2008
Robert Wolf, CEO of UBS Americas, who has bundled more than $370,850 for Barack Obama so far this year, is one of the most embarrassing skeletons in BO's money closet, now that the financial institution Wolf heads up in America has been outed in The Nation's Attack of the Global Pirate Bankers.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/4088

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 07:34 PM

My condolences to the lady. I am sure she would have rather suffered the inconvenience of bringing in a gusher!! Don't keep up inflating too long. You could bust a tire out altogether doing that. Ask that nice wrinkled man for one of them tire auges he's handing out.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 08:02 PM

>>>That is very true JTS I never said he did not say that. He did not say he we should not drill or that he was against drilling. My interpretaion was that drilling alone will not solve the crisis and it won't.

He did say "You're drilling and whatever you are able to find and put into the domestic system will help us." which indicates to me that he is for drilling.<<<

Therfore, ergo, ipso facto, presto, viola and to wit!

Obama was correct.

Keep in mind that Obama was not making the case against drilling. He was countering McCain's assertion that drilling would help lower gas prices today, and maybe also that other gem from the same commercial implying that Obama was solely and totally responsible for the high price of gas.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 12:24 PM

From the Washington Post

"...for McCain the energy issue has been a gift. There is perhaps no other topic in American politics today on which the public is angry, seeks action and agrees strongly with Republicans. McCain's approach is to do it all: drilling, nuclear, alternatives and conservation. Obama's approach has been reactive and irrelevant. What would his redistributed windfall profits tax do to produce energy or reduce the need for it? And Obama is hamstrung by a coalition that insists we will not drill our way out of this problem -- which is true but beside the point. No single approach will solve the problem in the short or medium term. And a nation in an energy crisis has every justification to extract its oil and natural gas while it pursues alternatives to oil and natural gas.

Second, Obama's tactics are undermining the unifying theory of his campaign. During the primaries, Obama presented himself as someone different, better and special. He would not only improve the economy and the health-care system, he would transcend old divisions and heal a broken land. Supporters embraced him as inspirational; detractors criticized him as messianic. Few doubt that he set the highest rhetorical goals since the New Frontier.

Since the primaries, Obama has made a tactical decision: He refuses to be painted as a liberal. America may be a discontented country, but it remains a center-right country. Democrats who understand this fact -- such as Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton -- become president. Democrats who don't lose elections.

But since Obama's short public career has been conventionally -- in some cases, extremely -- liberal, his tactical shift to the center has been startlingly obvious, on issues from guns to terror surveillance to Iraq, and now (reluctantly) to oil drilling. Says Peter Wehner of the Ethics and Public Policy Center: "Obama's political calculation may be correct, but it still involves a price. It has shattered his claim to be different. It calls into question his political character and leaves the impression he is consumed and defined by ambition."

At least temporarily, Obama's tactics have raised a damning political question: Who is this man? And the McCain campaign has begun to cleverly exploit these concerns, not with a frontal attack on his liberalism or his flip-flops but with a humorous attack on his "celebrity" -- really a proxy for shallowness. The argument is powerful: McCain has roots and convictions. Obama has fans and paparazzi. And Obama's European trip -- more Princess Diana than John Kennedy -- served only to confirm these impressions. "

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 03:56 PM

WHat journalistic "snidity".

Obama has been examined, cross-examined, researched and messed with to a huge degree. It is disingenuous to drum up such an issue. All the article tells me is that underhanded manipulation is still the order of the day in McCain's camp, and that a segment of the population is dull-witted enough to be manipulated thereby. But the latter is no news at all, since W's cronies and harpies proved that 4 years back and again 8 years back, breaking the peace, defecating on the tablecloths, and lying their way into the hearts and minds of Muricans evywhar.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 04:03 PM

In other words, everything posted is true, and you just object to the fact that someone dares to state it, since you have no comment on the specific statements.


"Obama's political calculation may be correct, but it still involves a price. It has shattered his claim to be different. It calls into question his political character and leaves the impression he is consumed and defined by ambition."


Anything here that is NOT true?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 04:03 PM

The Media response, especially the at the Washington Post, is the gift. McCain has not been called to task for changing his mind. Obama is called a flip-flopper on nearly every article and broadcast dealing with the issue. Its the same thing they did to Kerry. the question is can his grassroots supports overcome media bias?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 07:59 PM

"Obama's political calculation may be correct, but it still involves a price. It has shattered his claim to be different. It calls into question his political character and leaves the impression he is consumed and defined by ambition."


Anything here that is NOT true?

Yes.

1. It has not shattered his claim to be different that he is willing to meet people half-way. In fact, that has always been one of the things that was different aboput him -- he ahas continually argued against the "two camps divided" style of politics and the hard polarization made so poul;ar by the Bush Administration.

2. Furthermore, his character is demonstrated by the fact that he said he was willing to "not let perfection be the enemy of progres" and include what he did NOT like -- offshore drilling -- in a package which included much that he did like.

3. The impression of "consumed with ambition" is clearly a projection and not an attribute of the person being discussed, as (1) and (2) above simply disprove the claim.

He has a healthy ambition, but he is continuing to stand for the things he has always stood for while seeking to do some effective meeting of minds across the party divide. Tell me what is so wrong with that?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 10:18 AM

It's a good thing he didn't pick Edwards as a running mate before the woman with the baby popped up. But it does seem funny that Hillary's people didn't know about that, and Reverend Wright too. The fact that she just wasn't ruthless enough is probably how we got stuck with the Democratic candidate we have.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 10:49 AM

Oh, I think she's ruthless enough, but she didn't really need to go after Edwards, that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 01:41 PM

No, but she needed to go after Obama and her reconnaissance wasn't good enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 07:10 PM

"drilling would help lower gas prices today"

The announcement of drilling will bring down the price of crude due to the anticipation of more oil available in the future.

"In a dramatic move yesterday President Bush removed the executive-branch moratorium on offshore drilling. Today, at a news conference, Bush repeated his new position, and slammed the Democratic Congress for not removing the congressional moratorium on the Outer Continental Shelf and elsewhere. Crude-oil futures for August delivery plunged $9.26, or 6.3 percent, almost immediately as Bush was speaking, bringing the barrel price down to $136.
 Democrats keep saying that it will take 10 years or longer to produce oil from the offshore areas. And they say that oil prices won't decline for at least that long. And they, along with Obama and McCain, bash so-called oil speculators. And today we had a real-world example as to why they are wrong. All of them. Reid, Pelosi, Obama, McCain — all of them."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 07:22 PM

You seemed to overlook the ancient revered etiquette of citing where you steal you r lines from, Sawz.

In this case, it was a two-bit opinion in an anonymous letter sent in tot he Saint Louis Post-Despatch, in mid-July.

And just so the stupidity of the post you chose tyo quote from (without attribution) does embarrassment to all St Louisians everywhere, you might also mention it was answered shortly after by this one:

"Tango, I can not believe how incredibly blind you are. According to you all the good economic news over the past 8 years was because of Bush. All the bad new is a result of the democrats.

You never can conceive of an idea that Bush was build a pyramid scheme. In all such situations eventually it has to collapse. The housing mortgages that are fueling the economic troubles were taken out during the Bush Administration under normally 3 year adjustments. The mistake Bush made was not leaving office sooner so that he could sit on the sidelines and blame it all on his successor.

It is simple economics, but then I cannot expect you to understand anything beyond simple math.

Ñ Bob
6:53 pm July 17th, 2008        
"

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Aug 08 - 06:37 PM

Its hard to believe that there was a drop because of Bush's announcement. Bush has been for dropping that executive since before he was elected. Congress, both Republican and democratically lead has been his opposition. Is it credible that and announcement of something which is a mere formality and still requires an action by Congress, which Congress will not even bring to a vote, caused a steep price in the wholesale cost of oil.

Your problem Sawzaw is in ignoring news and in only listening to opinions with which you agree. That is a sure path to the perpetuation of ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 12:57 AM

Well well well Amos, If you didn't know where it came from, how come you found the response. And it was no more anonymous than the two-bit you posting you copied. It was signed Tango Golf Sierra.

Perhaps I should quote the Onion or maybe an imaginary comment between Ozzy and Harriet. That has much more weight.

And I did not indicate it was mine and put it in quotation marks indication someone else said it so how is that stealing?

You sure have to resort to trivial things to disprove facts while you cannot produce any your self.

Here is a simple test that does not require any of the rhetoric, hair splitting and ad hominem logical fallacies that you must employ to support your lack of credibility.

The announcement of drilling in ANWAR and more offshore drilling will bring down the price of crude in the oil trading market.

______True

______False

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 01:24 AM

Hurry Amos, find out where I stoled this so you can try to use that to discredit the fact and logic and claim it is false.

Or maybe you should research the claims made here and try to determine for your self how true they may be. That would seem the more logical thing to do. Then if you believe parts of it to be untrue you could say this particular part is untrue because__________ instead of your knee jerk condemnation of anything you see that didn't come from one of your left wing talking points sources.

But I have the feeling that as soon as you read something that does not jive with what Obama said, you feel an obligation to disagree immediately without even trying to figure out if it could be true.

"A new report from Wall Street research house Sanford C. Bernstein says that California actually could start producing new oil within one year if the moratorium were lifted. The California oil is under shallow water and already has been explored. Drilling platforms have been in place since before the moratorium. They're talking about 10 billion barrels worth off the coast of California.

There's also a "gang of 10" in the Senate, five Republicans and five Democrats, that is trying to work a compromise deal on lifting the moratorium. So it's possible a lot of action on this front could occur much sooner than people seem to think."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 02:03 AM

The announcement of drilling in ANWAR and more offshore drilling will bring down the price of crude in the oil trading market.

______True

______False

--------------------

Don't be an idiot. If it happens, it won't make any sustained difference. The speculators can read the economic reports as well as anyone can. Apparently they can read better than you.

It certainly won't make enough difference to justify McCain's ads.

If the price of gas at the pump drops 40 cents or more between now and September 11 will you give credit to the Democratic Congress for not drilling?

______True

______False

--------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Ron Davies
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 05:27 AM

Most of the wrangling on this thread recently has been an amazing waste of time--especially the drivel about polls. A poll is worse than a snapshot, since so many factors like phrasing of the questions, whether people without land lines are queried, etc,. enter into the result.


The ony important question is turnout on election day. At this point, even people in McCain's `'base' show limited enthusiasm for him. The same is not true for Obama.

We'll see if this changes as we approach election day.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 07:51 AM

Yes, it seems to be changing. Obama's base seems to be losing enthusiasm. He had to go to Hawaii on vacation because people were complaining about seeing too much of him in the news.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Ron Davies
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 08:16 AM

''had to go to Hawaii...."   As usual, blissfully free from any evidence.   Nice to know some things don't change.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Alice
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 10:11 AM

Going to Hawaii makes someone invisible? His trip to Hawaii, where his grandmother lives, where he also used to live WAS IN THE NEWS. What makes you think people being in Hawaii suddenly takes them out of the sphere of world news?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 11:00 AM

WHat a crock. You and Sawz are just the pair of jokers, Rig; inserting illogics and distortions faster than a water-cooled Gatling.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 11:19 AM

"a water-cooled Gatling."


I did not know there were water cooled Gatling Guns.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 11:19 AM

Very rare.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 11:31 AM

Must be!

I've worked on a watercooled IBM 360/45, but never heard of a gatling gun with cooling- I thought the Maxim was the first to use water cooling, due to the ingle barral.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 11:48 AM

Well, I have done a little more homework and find you are right; I misspoke. I should have written "water-cooled Maxim" or some other brand. It's a good thing the metaphorical image was not my main point, huh?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Barry Finn
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 12:07 PM

Should he not go to Hawaii?
What's that about???

"Obama's base seems to be losing enthusiasm"

I don't see it but do tell us about this, from your viewpoint.


Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 12:34 PM

'..."had to go to Hawaii...."   As usual, blissfully free from any evidence.'


                No, really, that's where he went. I read it in the National Inquirer.


                         ******



                      "Obama's base seems to be losing enthusiasm"


             Yeah, when he changed his mind on guns, abortion, campaign finance ethics, off shore oil drilling, and etc. etc., many of his former supporters whent to Nader and Cynthia McKinney.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 12:46 PM

You are spouting propoop-ganda, Rig. Aren't you ashamed of being so obdurate and insensitive?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 12:52 PM

Amos,

I think the reference is to:


Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama - Yahoo! News
Barack Obama may be the fresh face in this year's presidential election, but nearly half say they're already tired of hearing about him, a poll says.
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080806/ap_on_el_pr/poll_obama_overexposure
More pages from news.yahoo.com


Politics News - Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama
Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama. Find this and other news at Comcast.net. ... Politics News - Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama News ...
www.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20080806/Poll.Obama.Overexposure
More pages from comcast.net


Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama
Article:Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama:/n/a/2008/08/06/politics/p074439D67.DTL ... Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama. Wednesday, ...
www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/08/06/politics/p074439D67.DTL
More pages from sfgate.com


Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama
Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama. August 6, 2008 - 10:47am ... of independents said they've heard too much about Obama, as did a third of ...
www.wtop.com/index.php?nid=213&sid=1454733
More pages from wtop.com


Too Much Obama - Political Machine
Are you getting a little too much Obama and wanting to hear more ... Just 26% in the poll said they had heard too much about McCain, while a larger number ...
news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/08/06/too-much-obama
More pages from news.aol.com


Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama
WASHINGTON — Barack Obama may be the fresh face in this year's presidential election, but nearly half say they're already tired of hearing about him, a poll says.
www.news-journal.com/hp/content/shared-gen/ap/Presidential...l_Obama_Overexposure.html
More pages from news-journal.com


General News - Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama
Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama. Find this and other news at Comcast.net. ... General News - Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama News ...
www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20080806/Poll.Obama.Overexposure
More pages from comcast.net


www.kansascity.com | 08/06/2008 | Poll: Nearly half hearing too much ...
Barack Obama may be the fresh face in this year's presidential election, but nearly half say they're already tired of hearing about him, a poll says. extra description
www.kansascity.com/445/story/736328.html
More pages from kansascity.com


Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama - Boston.com
Barack Obama may be the fresh face in this year's presidential election, but nearly half say they're already tired of hearing about him, a poll says.
www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/2008/08/06/poll...ring_too_much_about_obama
More pages from boston.com


Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama
Poll: Nearly half hearing too much about Obama. Associated Press ... of independents said they've heard too much about Obama, as did a third of ...
www.politicalbase.com/news/poll-nearly-half-hearing-too-much-about-obama/112416
More pages from politicalbase.com






Now, aren't YOU ashamed of being so obdurate and insensitive?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 01:08 PM

"The effort reflects one of the most remarkable aspects of the 2008 campaign: Obama has turned himself into the central figure in American politics. That is an extraordinary achievement, but it comes at a price.

One cost was measured by a Pew Research Center study released last week that found that 48 percent of all those surveyed -- and 51 percent of the political independents -- said they had heard "too much" about Obama. Only 26 percent (and 28 percent of independents) said that about McCain.

This is understandable: From mid- to late-February until only the past week or so, Obama had received far more media attention than McCain, according to the Campaign Coverage Index produced by Pew's Project for Excellence in Journalism.

Obama's centrality has created an odd dynamic. The most important influences on the campaign are President Bush's unpopularity and the collapse of public sympathy for the Republican Party, meaning that a majority is inclined to vote for the Democratic nominee unless he is rendered unacceptable.


But with Bush fading into the background, McCain's campaign has been more about Obama than about himself. In recent weeks, McCain's advertising tossed one charge after another at the man painted serially as "the biggest celebrity in the world," "Dr. No" and "The One." McCain's attacks, which helped build Obama fatigue, continued over the weekend.

Yet Obama has absorbed the assaults and headed to his holiday in Hawaii holding an advantage of four to six percentage points -- roughly the same margin he has enjoyed all summer. This led political strategists in both parties with whom I spoke in recent days to challenge the conventional wisdom of an Obama campaign that is "underperforming." "


from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/10/AR2008081001867.html

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 01:20 PM

Of all the polls I have read about, it strikes me that one that asks "Aren't you tired of hearing about ____" is probably the most self-fulfilling, and it is pretty riidiculous as a data point in any case, IMHO. Really!! I am sure by the end of the Vietbname War a lot of people were very tired of hearing about Viet Nam, and by the time Tricky Dick retired, a lot of folks were tiored of hearing about Watergate, and I am sure there are billions who were tired of hearing about Monica's Blue Dress or Terry Schaivo's predicament.

So what?

This sort of noise-transfer just muddies the waters and makes the issues less real, which is a disservice.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 01:24 PM

>>Yes, it seems to be changing. Obama's base seems to be losing enthusiasm. He had to go to Hawaii on vacation because people were complaining about seeing too much of him in the news.

I think he went to Hawaii because he was seeing himself too much in the news. It is a vacation.