Bush's Third Term

Any doubts about what? I don't even understand the question, which means I don't understand the answer, either.

I had a grilled cheese for lunch.

AMC,

What is the context of that comment? That he has the ability to be commander and chief when the media keeps telling him he's can't?

And please don't compare the Sunni and Shia thing to 8 to 10 year thing. The media is the one who begins each converstation about John McCain with his sterling foreign and military cred.

AMC, it doesn't bother me when I read the context. Don't do a Wesley Clark on this.

///
Logan: "Is this trip partly aimed at overcoming that concern, that, you know, there are doubts among some Americans that you could lead the country at war as commander in chief from day one?"

Obama: "You know, the interesting thing is that the people who are very experienced in foreign affairs, I don't think have those thoughts. The troops that I've been meeting with over the last several days, they don't seem to have those doubts. The objective of this trip was to have substantive discussions with people like President Karzai or Prime Minister Maliki or President Sarkozy or others who I expect to be dealing with over the next eight to ten years.

"It's important for me to have a relationship with them early, that I start listening to them now, getting a sense of what their interests and concerns are, because one of the shifts in foreign policy that I want to execute as president is giving the world a clear message that America intends to continue to show leadership, but our style of leadership is going to be less unilateral, that we're going to see our role as building partnerships around the world that are of mutual interest to the parties involved. And I think this gives me a head start in that process."

Logan: "Do you have any doubts?"

Obama: "Never."
///

It seems to me they were still talking about doubts about his ability to be commander in chief. This question did not come out of the blue, like the one to Bush about his ever making a mistake.

This bothers me a lot more, AMC.

http://www.feministing.com/archives/009843.html

h/t Atrios

ivb's context makes clear that she's asking whether he doubts his ability to lead, not whether he has any doubts about anything ever. This isn't anything.

Impressive. I thought Scherer was going to walk away with yet another Fluffer of the Day Award due to sheer volume, but now comes Ana bringing the quality fluffing. Nicely done.

I don't see it as much either. You can't be a doubter if your aspirations include the presidency of the United States.

It sounds like you are holding Obama to task simply because he used the word "never" instead of "no".

I really doubt Obama believes he's never ever had doubts ever in his entire life, let alone admit this to the MSM. He was directly responding to Lara Logan's question.

"purity ball" link made said grilled cheese make unscheduled re-appearance.

Yeah, Doubter-in-Chief pretty much would assure McSame the election.

He didn't say he was the decider. He understands he sets the mission. Puts out an agenda and delivers a tone. Conveys a message and then leads. This is a far, far cry from the unilaterilist "I'm the decider" crap which Bush spewed.

And why assume that 8-10 years means he doesn't understand presidential term limits? President's tend to play a role officially or unofficially past their administration. And remember, he is a senator currently too. Though Obama maintains a consistent lead over McCain, he is certainly not guaranteed the election, especially when journos nit pick over things like this.

Cookie Puss will be glad to learn that I had nachos for lunch today.

Yes, I sense what AMC is really bothered by is that she is losing the race to Scherer to be McCain's press secretary. Though she should understand that normally a press secretary doesn't make it through a whole term...she'll still have shot. Maybe the McCain campaign can smooth her ruffled feathers w/ a lunch w/ Heidi Montag....entirely paid for of course.

I will say I'm pleasantly surprised at the MSM reaction to the Maliki endorsement of Obama's withdrawal policy. Even Stephen Hayes can't put a spin on it on the DJ Jazzy Dave show it seems.

LOL @ Cookie Puss

Anyway, regarding AMC's post:
This bothers me

Bullsh!t. If he'd said yes, we'd be seeing journalists crap their pants about a candidate that has doubts.
Find something new to be bothered by.
Maybe this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/17/italy.g8

Oh, how could I forget to include this in a post about stuff that's bothersome:

"Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, ‘Where is that marvelous ape?'"
-John McCain
Confirmed as true by the McCain campaign 7/17/08
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/tucsongorilla.pdf

I think the comment is similar to Hillary's Katie Couric interview when she told Couric that she had never even considered the possibility that she might not win. It stings of arrogance - regardless of whether you are talking about a policy matter, leadership ability, or confidence in your victory.

I'm not saying McCain isn't guilty of the same thing.

I'm just saying we're coming off a presidency where so many people were frustrated when mistakes were never acknowledged; mistakes were denied. We shouldn't demand perfection, but we should demand an honest examination of self, policies, and leadership.

http://www.politicswithagrin.blogspot.com/

I'm serious about that link, BTW. It's about the Italian police and WTO protestors, and it's disturbing as hell.

Bush's 3rd term = McCain.

As if getting shot down makes him qualified to be CINC...it really doesn't.

Cookie Puss will be glad to learn that I had nachos for lunch today.

Damn straight brutha!

So, what -- it would have been better for him to say:

"Yes, I sometimes doubt whether I can be commander-in-chief. Sometimes, you know, in the middle of the night, 3 am-ish, I have that nagging doubt. I think to myself: 'I've never been shot out of a plane -- can I really be ready?'"

Would that have "bothered" you less?

And what would McMaverick have said to that question, in your estimation? Since nothing he says appears to "bother" you ?

Oh, and for the love of Mike, I just noticed the title.

This ... THIS makes Obama Bush's third term???

* * *

A question: who really wrote Wonkette back in 2004?

Obama will never be known for modestry. He may not always be right, but he'll never be in doubt. Besides, he can switch positions from day to day so whatever he says today can change by the time I finish typing this. It must be nice to be able to cover every position in an argument . . . sort of like having a private debate in which you always win.

But breaking w/ tradition, I picked off the jalepenos. I like the taste they leave on the chips...I just don't like actually eating them. Also, I don't want to die today.

In all seriousness, I'm bothered that someone who gets paid to write, apparently can't read.

Logan: "Is this trip partly aimed at overcoming that concern, that, you know, there are doubts among some Americans that you could lead the country at war as commander in chief from day one?...Do you have any doubts?"(ellipsis inserted in order to aid AMC's inferior reading comprehension)

Obama: "Never."

I guess Logan never went to a purity ball. Ana? Oh that's right, this whole campaign is AMC's purity ball...w/ Maverick as Daddy.

As I typed this, David Shuster just issued a none too veiled threat to Obama that he'd better start giving the press better accomodations...or else.

"The objective of this trip was to have substantive discussions with people like President Karzai or Prime Minister Maliki or President Sarkozy or others who I expect to be dealing with over the next eight to ten years". Obama

Sorry Mr Obama, but if you don't even know how long the term limit is for a President of the United States, then you do not qualify to BE the President of the United States.

What a totally INEXPERIENCED and UNKNOWLEDGEABLE IDIOT this crackpot is.

How can anyone vote for this man?

I was trying to understand what bothered AMC when I recalled another politician who never has doubts.

AMC,

I have to ask. Are the PASSES really only reserved for John McCain? Come on you can tell us.

AMC: This bothers me..

So does your occasional lack of reading comprehension, Ana.

This is enough of response to AMC on this post.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3y3QoFnqZc

(Said in a monotone voice). "I am an Obamabot, Barak Obama can do no wrong. He is perfect. He is the best. HE IS MY MESSIAH".

Sheep follow, and this site is a perfect example of a bunch of sheep.

Take off the rose colored glasses already!

Obama went there as a senator, as he has said a couple of times. I see no reason to be alarmed about his saying 8-10 years perhaps because either he gets elected or not, he expects to stay as a senator as long and he'd have to deal with these people anyway. McCain flaunts about the long-term permanent bases as if he's going to live to see it and everyone else agrees with him, including the Iraqi government, without regards to presidential term limits. No one ever gets mad at him for it? What, it's okay for Republicans to say they want to rule that long but not okay for Democrats? WTH?

And Ana, do you really think Obama has even the slightest luxury to say he has doubts? In all seriousness? Whatever answer he gives, people will feast on him. This answer is actually the safer option.

People above have clearly provided the context for the doubts question. Regarding the 8-10 years things, do you think that former presidents immediately stop interacting in international affairs? Bill Clinton is still a major player internationally even 7 years after his second term ended. And take Tony Blair, who after his prime ministership is now exclusively involved with handling Middle East policy.

Posted by somereader | July 21, 2008 7:02 PM
And Ana, do you really think Obama has even the slightest luxury to say he has doubts? In all seriousness? Whatever answer he gives, people will feast on him. This answer is actually the safer option

And Hitler was an egtistical meglomaniac. How appropriate that we shall see Obama giving a speech at the same site that Hitler had re-erected to pronounce his superiority of all mankind.

Wow, Ana, that's some shoddy work there on your part. Extremely dishonest.

Egotistical meglomaniac, rather.

Godwin alert! Thread over!

Ana - what got into your drinking water? You think you would feel better if he said he doubted his capacity to be commander in chief?? Like that would be a good reason to vote for him. He apologizes all over the place because he allowed a family interview on an off day - says it's a mistake and he regrets it. This is not a man who never has doubts about anything.

I'm more concerned that this would bother you. Honestly, I am.

RustyQHObamish is getting his personalities mixed up again.

"As all the dads stood to read the covenent over their daughters, I felt the power of those words sink right into my heart. My father, the maverick John McCain, promised to lead a life of integrety and purity for me. He signed his name and I signed as a witness to, and message multiplier of his words. And as he escorted me to the good seats on Air Cindy, I felt empowered by his promise to war for my heart, truth, justice and freedom for Iraqis through his life of purity, and I knew my life would never be the same again..."
-Ana Marie Cox
http://www.generationsoflight.com/
(they misspelled integrity and covenant...hee hee)

Bottom Line: Cox Sux

Context Ana!

"Logan: "Is this trip partly aimed at overcoming that concern, that, you know, there are doubts among some Americans that you could lead the country at war as commander in chief from day one?"

Obama: "You know, the interesting thing is that the people who are very experienced in foreign affairs, I don't think have those thoughts. The troops that I've been meeting with over the last several days, they don't seem to have those doubts. The objective of this trip was to have substantive discussions with people like President Karzai or Prime Minister Maliki or President Sarkozy or others who I expect to be dealing with over the next eight to ten years.

"It's important for me to have a relationship with them early, that I start listening to them now, getting a sense of what their interests and concerns are, because one of the shifts in foreign policy that I want to execute as president is giving the world a clear message that America intends to continue to show leadership, but our style of leadership is going to be less unilateral, that we're going to see our role as building partnerships around the world that are of mutual interest to the parties involved. And I think this gives me a head start in that process."

Logan: "Do you have any doubts?"

Obama: "Never." '

What is wrong with you!

If he had doubts about whether he could lead the country as CIC he probably wouldn't have run.

Should someone running for CIC say - yeah, I have doubts about whether I'm up to the job.

I'm surprised at you. WTF.

Hehe.. you silly people really expect context?!

Rubes.

I actually think she's just trolling you all...

This bothers me:
Anybody taking AMC seriously. After one confused statement after another by McCain she pretends to be concerned about this.
It's almost as if she gives money to Rush Limbaugh, Oh wait.

"It's almost as if she gives money to Rush Limbaugh, Oh wait."

Pretty sure that financial transaction goes the other way.

No Cinc-she wrote that not only does she listen and like Rush AMC SUBSCRIBES to his web site. She wrote this proudly.
He doesn't need to waste his Oxy/Viagra/"offshore entertainment" money on Ana.

Wow, AMC.

Seriously, that's some high-grade wankery right there.

I feel rickrolled just reading this garbage.

AMC, your reporting bothers me

AMC, re: "Over the next 8 to 10 years."

He wouldn't be President until 2009, therefore his policies would play out over the next 8 - 10 years. Specifically the next 9 years.

The confidence (i.e. "I will have two terms) is the same that all Presidential candidates project. That's just standard any more. "When I'm President, I will...." not "If I'm President, I might...."

"So, what -- it would have been better for him to say:

"Yes, I sometimes doubt whether I can be commander-in-chief. Sometimes, you know, in the middle of the night, 3 am-ish, I have that nagging doubt. I think to myself: 'I've never been shot out of a plane -- can I really be ready?'" "

You guys are cracking me up with your Ana-bashing! There's nothing left to mock!

I had a fried egg sandwich for lunch. With HP sauce, it was so good.

She's so silly-Had BHO had a doubt she would be "bothered" that he wasn't strong like dadd oops I mean McCain. It's just AMC's Maureen Dowd wannabe observation.

AMC,

Does this bother you? Because these are the type of people whose lead you are following.

Martin Eisenstadt, a McCain advisor, posted a blog entry called "Obama's daughters huge Jonas Brothers fans. Keffiyeh Koincidence"

"I hope we’re not reading too much into this, but in the course of responding to media requests regarding the Jonas Brothers keffiyeh controversy, one of my interns alerted me to a story in the Indian press that revealed that Barack Obama’s daughters are big fans of the keffiyeh-wearing Jonas Brothers. All I can say is, “Oy.”

Now, I’m not one of those McCain supporters who believes in perpetuating ugly innuendos about Barack Obama’s faith or even his middle name. I believe Senator McCain can win in November fair and square. But….

http://www.eisenstadtgroup.com/2008/07/17/obamas-daughters-huge-jonas-brothers-fans-coincidence/

HP sauce? Do tell Red Snapper

HP sauce? It's the specialty Hewlitt Packard Honey Mustard BBQ sauce Carly Fiorina has been giving out...30 minutes after you eat it, you lay off all your employees and your George Foreman BBQ grill collapses.

This is a textbook example of the difference between left-leaning pundits and right-leaning pundits.

Right-leaning pundits ALWAYS keep the long view.

Let's say you are Bill Kristol. You want McCain to win, right? Okay. Now what percentage of the time do you think Kristol is going to go off the reservation and pen some screed about how McCain reminds him of Admiral Stockdale? How about never.

I'm not saying that Ana should never criticize Obama. And I'm not saying that she should be the disingenuous hack that most right-leaning pundits are. But, if you are going to compare Obama to Bush, wouldn't you do it over something substantive? Like Obama's support for faith-based programs, or his FISA vote?

Wouldn't you NOT compare your favored candidate to the least popular President in history simply because he expressed confidence to perform the job that he is running for?

Just asking.

space is your premise that AMC prefers BHO?
Do you have evidence to support that other than her claims of being a liberal?

At the risk of stating the obvious, I think we (the people of the democracy) would ALL be better served if we could never tell who a journalist supports.

/Tilting at windmills

MapGuy is your premise that AMC is a journalist?
Do you have evidence to support that other than her claims?

touche

Had you not included the link, I would say that this lacks context. But what seems to be lacking here is reading comprehension.

Is it possible that you read the question as, "Do you ever have doubts?"

But that wasn't the question. The question was, "Do you have doubts?" That means, according to my Strunk and White, absent a modifier in the question itself, that it was in furtherance of the question which preceded it.

But Ana, I am more interested in what bothered you about this. What is it that you are really trying to say here?

Some Republican operatives aren't taking Maliki's endorsement of Obama well at all:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/21/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4280852.shtml

space is your premise that AMC prefers BHO?
Do you have evidence to support that other than her claims of being a liberal?
Posted by Paul-no not that one

She posted once, I believe, that she'd probably vote for him. But one of the chief rules of Broderism is that conservatives, pols and pundits, can be as crazee as they wannabe. Only from the left (of center) do We demand Reasonableness, chiefly knee-jerk skepticism of all Democrats to left of, say, Chuck Schumer. I think Dickie Cohen is the best incarnation of this. And Ana is so pleased to have been asked to come sit at the grown-ups table....

touche, indeed.

I'm inclined to give ANC the benefit of the doubt there and buy into Interloper's troll hypothesis. Because otherwise ... (eyebrows raised)

Ummm...I'm pretty sure that grin at the end meant that he was kidding. Apparently, a dry sense of humor doesn't come off well in print, and often, people don't bother to watch the video.

No telling what this is about. Don't place much value in it.

What I know for sure is that Bush and his neocon punks had no doubts, and if Obama's no doubts are the opposite of that, I think I can live with it.

Will watch for future updates.

You know what bothers me?

"It is perhaps my greatest hope...that some day...future generations of American[s]...tying a millstone...around their necks..."

I urge Time's plucky band of internet "reporters" to insist that McCain answer for this vile statement! Why on Earth would the "greatest hope" of a candidate to be President of the United States be "tying a millstone" "around [the] necks" of "future generations of American[s]??????" Does he intend to drown our children in his insane bloodlust to kill future generations of Americans? Is this a man or a sick monster? VOTERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW!!!! GET US ANSWERS, ANA, PLEASE!!!!

Original quote found at http://www.allgreatquotes.com/john_mccain_quotes2.shtml. Out of context, you say? Chopped up beyond recognition, you cry? No more than what Ana did above, says I. This is hackery of the first order.

What? I'm especially confused by "Bush's Third Term".

Sadly, the lines between reporters and pundits have been hopelessly blurred in recent years. I have no idea whether Time.com even professes to adhere to the passe ethical standard of "unbiased" reporters. Certainly they don't in practice.

In any case, I'm pretty sure that AMC wants to pull the Obama lever. Why she wants to trash him first could probably only be explained by Maureen Dowd's therapist.

Christ almighty, AMC, if I buy you a bbq sandwich will you grow up? Is that all it takes?

"In any case, I'm pretty sure that AMC wants to pull the Obama lever"

Space, I'm not trying to be argumentative but I am curious what makes you think that. Judging by her writing here at Swampland she holds McCain in much higher regard than Obama.
I think her biography/reputation leads people to believe she has a different choice than what evidence would suggest.

And I completely agree with every word of your first paragraph.

Ana:

If that worries you, then you need to get out more. Read in its entire context, it makes perfect sense.

Of course, had he even come close to expressing any doubts, the Repub's would have a field day.

"In any case, I'm pretty sure that AMC wants to pull the Obama lever"

Actually, that was a double entendre. I have no idea who she wants to vote for.

"Bush's Third Term"

Jebus, Cox, that comes off as pretty asinine, considering all the thing Bush has done to the country since 2001, when he took office. Let's remember, presidents are elected in even years, but take office in the odd year following. Remember that, okay? There will be a quiz.

So, as far as the post title, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you were being facetious.

Now, let's prep for the quiz:

It is now 2008.

Obama, if he wins, will take office in 2009.

He would therefore face reelection in 2012.

If he wins again, his second term begins in 2013.

Another election will be held in 2016.

The next president would take office in 2017. For our purposes, we're assuming Obama wins a second term.

Okay, now the quiz! Ready?

2017 minus 2008 is what?

Oh! it's nine.

That number is between eight and ten.

There, how f$cking easy was that?

Jackass.

Posted by BrendanB | July 21, 2008 8:36 PM

Ah, I see you already did the math. Your reply was much more grown up, too. Good on you.

It's cool to be bothered by Obama lately it seems. Sigh. POTUS is about a lot more than weird vibes from cynical politicos. Cynical politicos are what brought us the faux parity of the 2000 campaign coverage and the resultant disaster that is the Bush 43 Presidency.

You're kidding right? If he had answered another way he would have been called "uncertain." Give me a break. I'm glad he's not doubtful. Since when is this a bad thing? Silly.

HP sauce is a steak sauce that happens to be delicious with eggs. I highly recommend it.

Ana has publicly gone on and on about how much she likes McCain personally and how this affection causes her to give him the benefit of the doubt. About everything, presumably.

I don't recall ever seeing or reading her talk about Obama as a person, as opposed to a candidate.

Bottom line: she may vote for Obama, but her heart will always belong to Dadd- er, McCain.

AMC, a little surprised to see this kind of post; I don't understand why you took this exchange out of context. Obama was asked about whether or not he had doubts about handling the CIC aspect of the presidency. Do you seriously think it would've been wise for him to say that had any doubts, even if has them, about his ability to handle the job? That would've been akin to political suicide. Also, he said "never" with a huge grin on his face, so it was likely said in jest.

I'd rather know who Lara's baby's father is, wondering all the while why it wasn't mine, frankly, than read this stupid piece of analysis.

I've met you and like you, Ana Marie. Please don't let me down.

Noting that The Man's influence is awfully hard to fight. So you have that going for you. Was this some sort of "I have to be balanced" commentary?

Sure seems like it. Any idiot who has been paying attention understands Obama is not overcome by the arrogance of knowing what is in his power.

Stop being bothered by the stoopid.

Respectfully.

I knew I could find it:

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/07/flop_sweat.html

I'm fine with people defending Obama's flip-flops, but I don't like pretending they don't matter. Especially if it's not just a simple change of some random position, but -- as with FISA -- a real rejection of a significant campaign promise. I'm probably going to vote for Obama, okay; I do not have to like it. I do not have believe that his awesomeness creates amnesia

I'm trying very hard to understand this. It appears it's ok for Obama to flip flop on Fisa and get a bit shaky on a few other points and it's totally wrong for Bush to never have any doubts but totally cool for Obama to be positive about everything. I'm just trying to understand. Just like AMC, I'm voting for Obama but I'm also realistic enough to know this may not work out as well as we all would like. Dude has a few drawbacks.

AMC:

"Never."

It doesn't actually bother me much at all.

I can understand why his whole deal smacks you of the kind of hubris we've been so hurt by (as a country) for the past eight years, though.

This kind of statement seems a little out of place for Obama, too. Normally you'd have the kind of ju-jitsu from him where he restates his opponent's argument rather fairly, and then refutes it handily (honestly or not). Think of his rhetoric in one of the debates with Hillary in which he turned the question of his hope salesmanship into "So you believe all of these millions of people are essentially dupes? Even the newspaper editorial boards?" The flat "Never." in response to the context of "there are doubts among some Americans that you could lead the country at war as commander in chief from day one" just seems weird. He basically says "well, anybody who knows anything about the subject disagrees" and "Never.", which isn't an acknowledgment of an understanding of anybody else's concerns whatsoever, which could be hubristic, I suppose.

It seems to me like the blowback that you're receiving from this is a bit extreme, especially the recipes for lemon merengue pie implying that post is dishonest trolling for controversy on your part. The whole "McCain's your surrogate daddy" bit is probably offensive from your perspective, too (not that I'm real hyper about offense, as you know).

So I'm sorry you're largely getting crapped on by commentary for posting an honest thought, AMC, even though I didn't find Obama's expression terribly troubling this time.

It is rather touching to see the Zechman-Cox romance developing. At least some good has come out of this rather foolish post....

Of course Obama said he had no doubts about his capacity to be Commander in Chief. What else could he have said? The Republicans would have loved a nice juicy clip of Obama admitting he might not be up to the job! Please, could we have some coherent analysis, without the attempts to sound funny or to fake up another empty controversy? Is it so much to ask?

Ana love, you are stretching, stretching. If Obama confessed doubts, what would you have said? something about how he was indecisive?

The truth that you pundits have to face is that you have created this (and you all will probably love this, because you like appearing powerful). You have made every candidate think not only whether what he/she is saying is TRUE, and whether it's going to win them votes, but how it will be MIsinterpreted by the pundits, and whether that misinterpretation is worse than the misinterpretation the press will have of any other comment.

You're all silly, and you've made the candidates silly too. But we know that any presidential candidate is likely (Bush=exception, as always) to stop being so silly once he has a country to run. Alas, you all will ALWaYS stay silly. I wonder when you're all going to decide to leave high school and graduate and enter the real world. You know, it's so not cool to think that high school is the time to linger in. But when you're forever in high school, you can't imagine anything else.

"I had a fried egg sandwich for lunch. With HP sauce, it was so good."

Red Snapper, I was thinking of an egg sandwich for lunch, and then thought, no, that's only for b'fast!! Ana will castigate me for that!

So I had a burger. Is that okay, Ana? Does that meet your approval? Or is it like a terrorist fist jab?

I'm with Zechman--it was an uncharacteristically flippant answer from a guy that gets a lot of love simply for always having the right answers to stupid questions. And it was a stupid question; a question that was vague and specifically designed to elicit a gotcha answer. Obama should have rejected the question as phrased and demanded a clearer rephrasal of the question, as he typically does, and then provided a clear answer that would expose the original question for being a stupid, gotcha-type question in the first place.

Maybe he was tired, maybe he didn't particularly like the interviewer, maybe he was in a rush, who knows. Nobody can bat a 1.000.

Anyways, all that said, it's also stupid to get worked up about a flippant answer to a stupid question that didn't even deserve an answer in the first place. Maybe Ana herself is being facetious though. Maybe we're the ones getting worked up over stupidity. She hasn't bothered to clarify so who knows.

Well, of course it bothers you, since you have taken it completely out of context. How about reading the previous response, which was the subject of the question about the doubts?

You know what bothers me? The complete lack of reading comprehension displayed repeatedly by some of the "reporters" here in Swampland. I shouldn't be amazed, but, somehow, I always am. Why are you getting paid for publicly displahying such a glaring lack of basic reading skills?

And, FYI, if Senator Obama should not win the Presidency, he will still be a member of the Senate and could easily be dealing with this for the next 8-10 years.

"displaying" - typing too fast :).

AM ".. the 8-10 years thing. Unless, of course, you think that slip of the tongue means that he actually is planning to run the country for ten years, .."

Sen Obama talked about 'dealing' with the world leaders. In what capacity would he be 'dealing' with them? Note that many of our ex-presidents, former senators and former high ranking government officials still 'deal' with world leaders in various capacities. Indeed Carter, Clinton and Kissinger are still active on behalf of America and their petty causes.

"This bothers me"
Is that all?
I suppose that to a reporter detached from the events 'this' ranks quite high compared to a kid who may have been bombed to smithereens yesterday in Iraq teeming with WMDs.

stuart_zechman - Obama was asked about Himself - does he personally have any doubts - "Do YOU have any doubts?".
I certainly think he is qualified to give such a strong declaration re HIS OWN personal view.

He isn't ascribing it to others like the example you gave where Hillary had essentially been implying that Obama supporters were delusional. Obama fought back against that idea by referencing the Editorial page editors who had endorsed him and defending his supporters.

An earlier post today by Michael - "The False Messiah Argument" - states that the McCain campaign may start that kind of attack again - attacking Obama supporters. I remember the ju-jitsu you mention because Obama used it to defend his supporters. It wasn't the first time.

I remember when the argument against Obama was that (ssshhh - whisper it) he is Black (who knew!) so supposedly he can't win. He just pointed out that that crap wasn't an attack on him, it was an attack on the American voters and that he has more faith and belief in the basic decency of the American people. Those arguments are always extremely effective but very different IMO from what he was asked which, for some reason, concerns Ana so much.

I think people are reacting this way because we are somewhat surprised to see it coming from Ana.

"This bothers me"
LOL There is a possibility that is constitutional too, AMC.
SCENARIO:
Obama wins presidential elections in 2008 and 2012.
Now, should Obama swamp Clinton (and other contenders) and win the presidential election 2016 ...
[Do you remember that a few months ago, many charged that Bill Clinton was gunning for a third term!]

He He
It is enough to make Limbaugh blow a fuse ..

Not sure what happened here AMC. This seems like a pretty obvious response, and any alternative response to questioning his ability to be CIC would have been foolhardy, at best.

Either you didn't really listen/read the whole discussion, or you just had an O'reilly moment. I'll give ya the benefit of the doubt you misunderstood or missed the context, but as a *cough* journalist *cough* people do tend to expect a bit better self review prior to posting.

I have to assume Ana read this on the road, or this was the result of one of those campaign emails Scherer is always talking about.

Rory Stewart wrote in a TIME article 7/17/08 on solutions for Afghanistan that "The recent elimination of the opium crop in Nangarhar, for instance, was driven by the will and charisma of a local governor and owed little to Western-funded "capacity-building seminars".

To me, Obama's plans for the Afghan's future seem as top-down and arrogant from the left as Bush's plans for permanent military presence in Iraq seemed top-down and arrogant from the right.

Obama said in his NYT op-ed that in withdrawing our troops from Iraq "We would move them from secure areas first and volatile areas later." I want those in volatile areas drawn back first, with the aid and protection of our troops in stable areas. Obama is bright and eye-catching, a sure winner at your family or social gatherings. But that isn't what I want a President for. I want a President whose actions won't make our country deeply regret that we elected him.

Yes, that's right. Take Obama's comment out of context and make it in to something it is. Par for the rightwing MSM. Can't you guys even TRY to look like you're non-partisan?

Something it's not, rather.

Context = make their head hurt!

I can understand why his whole deal smacks you of the kind of hubris we've been so hurt by (as a country) for the past eight years, though.

It does? This was a fairly closed-ended exchange, stuart. Obama was clearly not saying that he never has any doubts at all, just that he has no doubts that he can "lead the country at war as commander in chief from day one." So he has no doubts that he's qualified for the office in that regard. McCain's supporters, all seven or eight of them, and the "Hillary or Death" crowd may not share that opinion, but I'd sure rather have a president who believes he's qualified for the job (a description that, I would guess, covers all but maybe--MAYBE--two or three holders of that office in the history of this country) than one who is constantly plagued with fear that he's in over his head.

Bush's hubris is that he believes every decision he makes is the divinely-inspired right one. Obama may share that hubris, but that is not at all in evidence based on this exchange.

FastEddie:
I thoroughly agree with your analysis, which is why I told AMC that I didn't have a problem with Obama's statement. My point was that, given the bending-over-backwards-to-acknowledge-one's-opponents-arguments approach imbued in Obama's (recent) past rhetorical methods and devices, this kind of declaration sounds somewhat suspect, as if Obama doesn't feel the need for such reasonable-sounding rhetoric anymore. To people who are sensitive after Obama's "F*ck You" FISA episode, it can compound what may show up on the hubris-radar.

It's understandable, FastEddie. One doesn't have to be in the tank for McCain to imagine a troublesome pattern developing. Again, I'm not saying that it particularly troubles me, just that it's not ridiculous or insane for AMC to express these kind of suspicions. The only people who can't express doubts about politicians' potential for disastrous hubris are those who feel the duty to carry water for whatever candidate to whom they've attached themselves, or idiots.

Speaking of hubris...

"McCain's supporters, all seven or eight of them..."

Surely that sort of (supposedly) Hillary-esque "inevitability" talk isn't what's needed from Obama supporters, right, FastEddie?

It's understandable, FastEddie.

I'll ask again: it is? Is it really reasonable to chop off the entire relatively lengthy lead in to that five-word question and one-word answer and then draw conclusions from same? Is that in any way "understandable?" I don't think so. I think it's a cheap attempt to make a problem where one clearly does not exist.

it's not ridiculous or insane for AMC to express these kind of suspicions.

Nobody is really arguing that she can't express those suspicions; rather that, if she's going to do so, she ought to back them up with something better than six words chopped completely free from their context. That's the problem here, stuart, not the "expression" of "suspicion" that Obama has an ego, something most people would readily acknowledge (and something that could have been "expressed" about virtually, if not entirely, every aspirant to the Presidency that this country has ever seen).

The only people who can't express doubts about politicians' potential for disastrous hubris are those who feel the duty to carry water for whatever candidate to whom they've attached themselves, or idiots.

One could say something similar about those who routinely feel the need to erect strawmen to knock down instead of staying with the discussion at hand, stuart.

Speaking of hubris...

Surely that kind of schoolmarmish scold can be left out of this, right, stuart?

May you have no idea about what I give you ,but it will help you a lot indeed.What you just do is to look througnt them!FLV to MP3AVI to FLV MacWMV to FLV MacMPEG/MP4/MPG to FLV MacASF to FLVDivx to FLvFLV to Ipod FLV to PSP FLV to Zune FLV to 3GP