Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to NewsvineHe's still not saying what he meant by refined and it's surprising that he doesn't get that he has to be careful in choosing his words. His position means something and he can't be imprecise and keep people guessing. If he's shifting positions, the voters have a right to know:
"For me to say that I'm going to refine my policies I don't think in any way is inconsistent with prior statements and doesn't change my strategic view that this war has to end and that I'm going to end it as president," Obama told reporters on his campaign plane.[...]
"I was a little puzzled by the frenzy that I set off with what I thought was a pretty innocuous statement," he said on a flight from Montana to St. Louis. "I am absolutely committed to ending the war. I will call my joint chiefs of staff in and give them a new assignment and that is to end the war."
[...]
"I'm surprised at how finely calibrated every single word was measured. I wasn't saying anything I hadn't said before, that I didn't say a year ago or when I was a United States senator,"
[...]
"The tactics of how we ensure our troops are safe as we pull out, how we execute the withdrawal -- those are things that are all based on facts and conditions," he said.
"I'm not somebody who, like George Bush, is willing to ignore facts on the basis of my preconceived notions. I want to pay attention to what is happening on the ground."
Um...did Obama resign from the Senate? :-)
Isn't his preconceived notion that he has to remove troops from the ground and end the war? But what if he goes to Iraq, talks to the people who actually know what's going on over there and discovers that pulling troops is dangerous to the Iraqis and our soldiers, what then? Does he still go through with his plan to remove troops despite the risk? How is that different from what he's accusing Bush of doing?
I agree with McCain's spokesman:
"What's really puzzling is that Barack Obama still doesn't understand that his words matter," said McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds.You'd think that a man who makes such a big to do over words in his "Just Words" shtick would understand the importance of word choices when speaking to the press. I think his amazement demonstrates how green he really is.
Subscribe
Comments
So, who are these bloggers who illicit your best comments? I want to go to their blog and read your comments to see if they are as brilliant as you claim.
Where I comment isn't the issue. Your posts and their distinct lack of quality are. In general, if your posts were better, you'd get better comments.
BTW, if you want two good places to start here at Beliefnet, I'd recommend Rod Dreher's blog as well as Steven Waldman. Both of them offer intelligent, articulate posts. Rod's also a conservative, and his blog is very active with comments. Read both of them. Learn from them. See how they write and how they generate the discussions and topics that they write about.
Another good blog is Jim Wallis'. He offers a lot of really good, interesting writers, all of whom talk about both religion and politics and they do it well.
You could learn a lot by reading them. Maybe if you read them all for a while and if you legitimately learned by their example and tried to improve your blogging from just posting one-liners, out of context or meaningless political attacks, and YouTube videos, you might be able to connect with your audience better.
Posted by: LJG | July 7, 2008 10:42 PM
Michele, I beg your pardon, but there are two versions of my comments on 7/6, both posted at 11:31 p.m., and one of them has been heavily edited, NOT by me. (I did not see that the earlier, unedited version had been posted, which is why I said "Michele evidently deleted my comments" in my reply to G.A.T., who by the way seems to be either semi-literate or viciously insulting, since he doesn't understand or deliberately misinterprets my moniker, which refers to the well-known usage, "yellow dog Democrat," meaning someone who, rather than vote for a Republican, would vote for "an old yella dawg." In my case, that's a bit of an exaggeration, as I might well vote for Chuck Hagel if the person he were running against had been less courageous than he in opposing this stupid war.)
Posted by: yelladawgNC | July 8, 2008 8:07 AM
"Um...didn't you realize I was addressing LJG?"
yes, but you said "the left." which, since the right has shifted this country so far off track, i'm now part of "the left." so, take care when painting with such a broad brush when i provided you with what you asked, without an ad hominem that you accuse the left of resorting to... in the midst of your ad hominem attacks no less.
Posted by: anonymous reincarnate | July 9, 2008 1:06 AM
guy, you're a great caricature of the loose wingnuts commonly found in conservative circles. thank you!
Posted by: anonymous reincarnate | July 9, 2008 1:13 AM
"yes, but you said "the left." which, since the right has shifted this country so far off track, i'm now part of "the left." so, take care when painting with such a broad brush when i provided you with what you asked, without an ad hominem that you accuse the left of resorting to... in the midst of your ad hominem attacks no less."
Sorry but you are inserting yourself in an argument that you are not involved. I can make a description that fits generally without it fitting you in this particular instance especially when I'm not even thinking about you but the fact that his/her comment was filled with ad hominem attacks.
Posted by: Michele McGinty | July 9, 2008 10:32 AM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?