A question of credibility for Obama?

That's the question you should be asking.

It's not perfect, but when it works, it's great.
http://www.glenburniemd.net/FacialRecognitionSoftware.jpg
Still needs some tweaking.

for President. I feared tremendously over his campaign words, long before I actually became a FoxNews (cable/satellite) watcher (that didn't happen until four months ago because I was an avid CNN watcher). His 'promises' were actually agenda threats that were silver tongued and people bought into it all. If 9-11 had never happened, perhaps one of the other candidates would have won instead instead of putting the country's faith in someone who kept insisting that he could bring peace in the middle east by 'talking' to insane people declaring they wanted us dead. He had/has so much support from his backers because of his ability to be a great community organizer with the ability to orate well (even if it's via a teleprompter) that he even convinced himself that where Bush was portrayed as a bumbling idiot by the media and talk shows who broke the English language every time he opened his mouth, Obama could do much better and get the job done with his eloquence command of the language and get all the mid-east to end up with a 'party in their pants' in ecstasy to quote Glenn Beck.

Obama spoke during his campaign telling the American people exactly what his agenda was...but the people were so busy swooning that they didn't hear the actual words.

This thread was started contrary to what your accusation is about my gathering evidence. We already have that. My question was, with all the publicity over HOW Obama was able to get arms twisted in back room deals and threats to his OWN party, do you honestly believe that any world heads can believe anything he says without suspecting that what he says to your face is NOT necessarily what he's actually going to do behind the door. I believe that the Health Care bill procedures have given the world heads another whole picture of who they are dealing with and what Chicago politics is in full light and that he has lost any credibility he might have thought he had with any of them.

TONI H

you. What was his margin of victory anyway? More than 3 million votes out of the largest turnout in some time. I think credibility is not found in the perceptions of a single person already inclined to despise him, but in the millions of voters who found him not only credible but inspirational. There are still plenty of people who find Martin Luther King not credible, but the US Senate and Congress disagreed, as did hundreds of millions of people over the years.

Credibility may be in the eye of the beholder but 6 million (eyes) trump two.

Rob

"but in the millions of voters who found him not only credible but inspirational"

There is an interview that was done during the voting with a woman who was asked why she was there at the voting booth. Her response was "we're here for the money". When asked where money was coming from, she responded "Obama". When asked where Obama was getting the money, she responded "I don't know...his stash".

Many of those millions of people who voted for him didn't necessarily find him credible....except to the extent that they took him at his word that handouts would be coming in abundance to them if they voted. In that interview, she ended the 'money' interview with "That's why we voted for him....we love Obama".

So my question to you is this: When his term ends and he's running again, and the money has finally run out, how many of those people who were 'bribed' for their vote will run to the voting booths a second time to vote him back in?

TONI H

I'd have to wonder how much that margin was affected by votes against McCain rather than for Obama. Logic tells me that, because so much emphasis is placed on bringing out the negative attributes of a candidate by the opposition, someone has figured out that voting against is as much if not more important than voting for a candidate.

Obama ran against Bush, not McCain. There was very little chance of any Republican winning last time, and the candidate was particularly weak.

But what of it. The fact that Obama managed to fool a lot of people is NOT justification foo him doing whatever the hell he wants, as he seems to think. "I won." has no shelf life past the time of the actual election.

BTW, I always vote against. It makes more sense to me, since we rarely have great candidates, one must choose between the lesser of two evils.

Some say "I won"

others say I'm going to "spend political capital"

Spend?...Spend what?

What was that guys name?

OK I got it Bush, that was his name

I was amazed by it. Amazed by how many voters went to the polls more than one, how many dead or non existent voters sent in absentee ballots, how big the voter turnout in absentee ballots by Alzheimer's patients in nursing homes were, amazed police allowed black panthers to turn away white voters at one polling place, amazed by how many non existent voters were registered through ACORN. Yes, I think all America was Amazed. Now I think America is angry, and gnashing the teeth till they can partially correct the mistake in November 2010, laming the duck in the white house.

And no, not surprising most of them voted for Bush. That's why the Democrats tried to keep them from being counted. They KNEW the military overwhelmingly supported Bush.

it was covered extensively at the time. The Gore people tried to have them invalidated. Quite disgraceful.

We are fortunate that Gore was prevented from stealing that election.

-chuckle-

It got WORSE. I doubt that's the "change" many of his supporters were expecting.

the Republicans aren't cooperating changing things.

Kees

Unlike the mob mentality that often prevails when a political crime is being committed against the people.

they don't want America to be destroyed.