<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Obama &#8212; Philosopher in Chief</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/</link>
	<description>Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:19:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Swine flu epidemic.</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-48639</link>
		<dc:creator>Swine flu epidemic.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 May 2009 04:34:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-48639</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;1976 swine flu....&lt;/strong&gt;

Swine flu. 1976 swine flu. Swine flu epidemic. Swine flu shot....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>1976 swine flu&#8230;.</strong></p>
<p>Swine flu. 1976 swine flu. Swine flu epidemic. Swine flu shot&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: suek</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-27318</link>
		<dc:creator>suek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:14:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-27318</guid>
		<description>&gt;&gt;I hadn’t really considered the possibility of paralysis for Obama.
...
 if he becomes President, is there any further reason for him to hide his true intentions?&gt;&gt;

Two _really_ good statements.  First, I think the analysis paralysis is the problem that Kerry also had...it&#039;s a problem for any thinking person, but most practical people recognize that they _have_ to make a decision...

unless...

statement two comes into play.  Now Kerry, I think, just had the analysis paralysis.  I _do_ think he was a Globalist, and way too charitable to socialists/communists, but I don&#039;t think he actually _was_ one.  He also didn&#039;t have a lot of history to hide.  But Obama...now this man was raised  and in doctrinated by a communist believing mother, had as a close advisor an avowed and declared communist, and has associated himself with communists during his adult years.  He has covered up or made unavailable information about his connections with these people - and when people cover up, they have to _know_ that there&#039;s a reason why.  So Obama, I think, definitely has an agenda that he recognizes that the populace will not accept if they see it.  He wants to be the leader of a people who would not agree with his policies if they knew them.  Can you say &quot;Chavez&quot;???  How far would Dems go to support him?  I wonder.

One of the things that I&#039;ve found interesting is the reaction to the statement &quot;you&#039;re either with us or against us&quot;.  It drives many libs nuts.  Why?  at some point, you&#039;d think they&#039;d recognize that the voting handle has to be pulled...a decision must be made.  But instead, they go on and on about &quot;you right wingers want everything to be black and white, but there&#039;s a lot of space inbetween&quot;.  True...there&#039;s often lots to consider...but at some point, damn it, you _have_ to make a decision!!!  If you won&#039;t, there you are ... nowhere!  But I think that&#039;s why they pick leaders like Kerry and Obama - because they feel good about _not_ making a decision about what&#039;s good/bad, right/wrong.  No decision and you can&#039;t be wrong.  You can tell the press that you &quot;said that&quot; last week or last month.  And you probably did - don&#039;t worry that you said the opposite the week or month before that...after all, you have to consider all sides!   They&#039;re scared silly about making a _wrong_ decision!   They _can&#039;t_ be wrong!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;&gt;I hadn’t really considered the possibility of paralysis for Obama.<br />
&#8230;<br />
 if he becomes President, is there any further reason for him to hide his true intentions?&gt;&gt;</p>
<p>Two _really_ good statements.  First, I think the analysis paralysis is the problem that Kerry also had&#8230;it&#8217;s a problem for any thinking person, but most practical people recognize that they _have_ to make a decision&#8230;</p>
<p>unless&#8230;</p>
<p>statement two comes into play.  Now Kerry, I think, just had the analysis paralysis.  I _do_ think he was a Globalist, and way too charitable to socialists/communists, but I don&#8217;t think he actually _was_ one.  He also didn&#8217;t have a lot of history to hide.  But Obama&#8230;now this man was raised  and in doctrinated by a communist believing mother, had as a close advisor an avowed and declared communist, and has associated himself with communists during his adult years.  He has covered up or made unavailable information about his connections with these people &#8211; and when people cover up, they have to _know_ that there&#8217;s a reason why.  So Obama, I think, definitely has an agenda that he recognizes that the populace will not accept if they see it.  He wants to be the leader of a people who would not agree with his policies if they knew them.  Can you say &#8220;Chavez&#8221;???  How far would Dems go to support him?  I wonder.</p>
<p>One of the things that I&#8217;ve found interesting is the reaction to the statement &#8220;you&#8217;re either with us or against us&#8221;.  It drives many libs nuts.  Why?  at some point, you&#8217;d think they&#8217;d recognize that the voting handle has to be pulled&#8230;a decision must be made.  But instead, they go on and on about &#8220;you right wingers want everything to be black and white, but there&#8217;s a lot of space inbetween&#8221;.  True&#8230;there&#8217;s often lots to consider&#8230;but at some point, damn it, you _have_ to make a decision!!!  If you won&#8217;t, there you are &#8230; nowhere!  But I think that&#8217;s why they pick leaders like Kerry and Obama &#8211; because they feel good about _not_ making a decision about what&#8217;s good/bad, right/wrong.  No decision and you can&#8217;t be wrong.  You can tell the press that you &#8220;said that&#8221; last week or last month.  And you probably did &#8211; don&#8217;t worry that you said the opposite the week or month before that&#8230;after all, you have to consider all sides!   They&#8217;re scared silly about making a _wrong_ decision!   They _can&#8217;t_ be wrong!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 1Lulu</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-27312</link>
		<dc:creator>1Lulu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 04:57:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-27312</guid>
		<description>He did not identify the deeds of radical Islam as evil. He did not mention it at all. 

Child abuse, city streets (referring to what exactly?), and Darfur. We know Obama can&#039;t stop child abuse, it&#039;s a throw away line. But who, Mr. Obama, is committing the evil acts in Darfur? How will you nuance your way out of genocide?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>He did not identify the deeds of radical Islam as evil. He did not mention it at all. </p>
<p>Child abuse, city streets (referring to what exactly?), and Darfur. We know Obama can&#8217;t stop child abuse, it&#8217;s a throw away line. But who, Mr. Obama, is committing the evil acts in Darfur? How will you nuance your way out of genocide?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Devx</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-27308</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Devx</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 02:32:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-27308</guid>
		<description>Book says,
&quot;The problem with Obama’s approach, however, is that it’s one that leads to complete paralysis.&quot;

And Danny corroborates in #8
&quot;All this certainly helps to explain Obama’s many, many “present” votes on the all tough issues presented to the Illinois Senate.&quot;

I hadn&#039;t really considered the possibility of paralysis for Obama.  As Book and Danny both point out, it&#039;s certainly been true in the past.  But if he becomes President, is there any further reason for him to hide his true intentions?  Remember, he&#039;ll have a Democrat majority in the House and Senate, and no reason to equivocate on advancing the programs he REALLY believes in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Book says,<br />
&#8220;The problem with Obama’s approach, however, is that it’s one that leads to complete paralysis.&#8221;</p>
<p>And Danny corroborates in #8<br />
&#8220;All this certainly helps to explain Obama’s many, many “present” votes on the all tough issues presented to the Illinois Senate.&#8221;</p>
<p>I hadn&#8217;t really considered the possibility of paralysis for Obama.  As Book and Danny both point out, it&#8217;s certainly been true in the past.  But if he becomes President, is there any further reason for him to hide his true intentions?  Remember, he&#8217;ll have a Democrat majority in the House and Senate, and no reason to equivocate on advancing the programs he REALLY believes in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Devx</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-27307</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Devx</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 02:29:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-27307</guid>
		<description>Hi Gringo, yes, I know John Bolton isn&#039;t U.N. Ambassador.  But during a McCain Presidency, we might very well see him back there.  A bulldog among neurotic Chihuahuas.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Gringo, yes, I know John Bolton isn&#8217;t U.N. Ambassador.  But during a McCain Presidency, we might very well see him back there.  A bulldog among neurotic Chihuahuas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gringo</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-27272</link>
		<dc:creator>Gringo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 03:54:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-27272</guid>
		<description>In a sense, the Saddleback conversation was a job interview for the position of President.
One of the classic job interview questions is, “Tell me about yourself.”  The interviewer is not looking for an extended life history from the job candidate. Instead, the job candidate should relate to the interviewer what he/she has done that would show that he/she has the skills necessary for the job. 

“Tell me about yourself.”
“I started out grilling hamburgers at McDonalds, and  in a years’s time worked my way up to crew chief. I set schedules, trained new workers, and made sure that any dissatisfied customers left happy.”  This is what the interviewer wants to hear. The interviewer doesn’t care about the job candidate’s favorite vacation spots or TV  shows.

McCain approached the question about evil as a job candidate. How does “evil” relate to the job of President? We have an evil opponent. Get at it.  McCain dealt with this question in some detail, which showed that he wasn’t just repeating some stock phrase, but had pondered the issue. Whereas, Obama handled the question as if it dealt with his philosophy of life. As Book pointed out, we are not looking for a Philosopher-in-Chief, we are looking for a Commander-in-Chief.

Mike: Are you aware that &lt;a href=&quot;//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Bolton&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; John Bolton&lt;/a&gt;  is no longer UN Ambassador ? It was a recess appointment, because of filibustering on the part of the Democrats.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a sense, the Saddleback conversation was a job interview for the position of President.<br />
One of the classic job interview questions is, “Tell me about yourself.”  The interviewer is not looking for an extended life history from the job candidate. Instead, the job candidate should relate to the interviewer what he/she has done that would show that he/she has the skills necessary for the job. </p>
<p>“Tell me about yourself.”<br />
“I started out grilling hamburgers at McDonalds, and  in a years’s time worked my way up to crew chief. I set schedules, trained new workers, and made sure that any dissatisfied customers left happy.”  This is what the interviewer wants to hear. The interviewer doesn’t care about the job candidate’s favorite vacation spots or TV  shows.</p>
<p>McCain approached the question about evil as a job candidate. How does “evil” relate to the job of President? We have an evil opponent. Get at it.  McCain dealt with this question in some detail, which showed that he wasn’t just repeating some stock phrase, but had pondered the issue. Whereas, Obama handled the question as if it dealt with his philosophy of life. As Book pointed out, we are not looking for a Philosopher-in-Chief, we are looking for a Commander-in-Chief.</p>
<p>Mike: Are you aware that <a href="//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Bolton" rel="nofollow"> John Bolton</a>  is no longer UN Ambassador ? It was a recess appointment, because of filibustering on the part of the Democrats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: roylofquist</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-27267</link>
		<dc:creator>roylofquist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:45:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-27267</guid>
		<description>One of the more perceptive expressions from my chosen career: &quot;Paralysis by analysis&quot;.

The one that stuck with me from my first real job: &quot;There are two kinds of bayonet fighters. The quick and the dead&quot;.

The bear has come out of hibernation. Thank God for John McCain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the more perceptive expressions from my chosen career: &#8220;Paralysis by analysis&#8221;.</p>
<p>The one that stuck with me from my first real job: &#8220;There are two kinds of bayonet fighters. The quick and the dead&#8221;.</p>
<p>The bear has come out of hibernation. Thank God for John McCain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny Lemieux</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-27266</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny Lemieux</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:02:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-27266</guid>
		<description>All this certainly helps to explain Obama&#039;s many, many &quot;present&quot; votes on the all tough issues presented to the Illinois Senate. He just needed more time to debate with himself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All this certainly helps to explain Obama&#8217;s many, many &#8220;present&#8221; votes on the all tough issues presented to the Illinois Senate. He just needed more time to debate with himself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Devx</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-27257</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Devx</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:08:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-27257</guid>
		<description>I second Earl&#039;s:
[Obama&#039;s] first instinct seems to be a moral equivalence, at best….note what he came out with on Russia/Georgia. If he isn’t seeing both sides as equally bad, it’s the United States that comes out on the short end of Obama’s stick.
----------
Obama would a fantastic choice for us to appoint to the U.N. as a diplomat.  NOT as the U.S. Ambassador - we continue to need John Bolton in that role!  But perhaps as one of three advisors to the Ambassadorship.

I&#039;d like to think that would give Obama the real-world exposure he so desperately needs.  Something outside of his Harvard and Chicago echo chambers, and the far-left childhood instruction/brainwashing he received.  And by the way, that is my main concern about the schools he went to overseas and the far-leftism to be found at his mother&#039;s knee. Not that he was raised as a Muslim, but exactly what kind of a viewpoint towards America did he receive when he was over there?  Those are the formative years... what did he LEARN (sarcasm intended) about America?

Obama has had forty-five years to get himself OUT of that endlessly repeating far-left echo-chamber, and he hasn&#039;t done it yet.  Perhaps he likes it in there too much to ever leave.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I second Earl&#8217;s:<br />
[Obama's] first instinct seems to be a moral equivalence, at best….note what he came out with on Russia/Georgia. If he isn’t seeing both sides as equally bad, it’s the United States that comes out on the short end of Obama’s stick.<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-<br />
Obama would a fantastic choice for us to appoint to the U.N. as a diplomat.  NOT as the U.S. Ambassador &#8211; we continue to need John Bolton in that role!  But perhaps as one of three advisors to the Ambassadorship.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d like to think that would give Obama the real-world exposure he so desperately needs.  Something outside of his Harvard and Chicago echo chambers, and the far-left childhood instruction/brainwashing he received.  And by the way, that is my main concern about the schools he went to overseas and the far-leftism to be found at his mother&#8217;s knee. Not that he was raised as a Muslim, but exactly what kind of a viewpoint towards America did he receive when he was over there?  Those are the formative years&#8230; what did he LEARN (sarcasm intended) about America?</p>
<p>Obama has had forty-five years to get himself OUT of that endlessly repeating far-left echo-chamber, and he hasn&#8217;t done it yet.  Perhaps he likes it in there too much to ever leave.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Earl</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/08/18/obama-philosopher-in-chief/comment-page-1/#comment-27256</link>
		<dc:creator>Earl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:03:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3439#comment-27256</guid>
		<description>Jonah Goldberg posted on The Corner, defending (sort of) Obama&#039;s response to this question about evil.  Here is the link: 
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTdkOTU0NDQzNjVlZDRmN2IxMjYxMTJjODc2NTBkMjI=
He thinks Obama DID have a specific target in mind during this answer, but it was the U.S., and his political instincts are still good enough that he knew THAT answer wasn&#039;t going to earn him any votes, on balance.

I think that&#039;s about right - his first instinct seems to be a moral equivalence, at best....note what he came out with on Russia/Georgia.  If he isn&#039;t seeing both sides as equally bad, it&#039;s the United States that comes out on the short end of Obama&#039;s stick.

McCain may not have been as &quot;thoughtful&quot; in his answer to this question, but when the excrement hits the fan, he&#039;s the guy I want at the head of our military!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonah Goldberg posted on The Corner, defending (sort of) Obama&#8217;s response to this question about evil.  Here is the link:<br />
<a href="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTdkOTU0NDQzNjVlZDRmN2IxMjYxMTJjODc2NTBkMjI" rel="nofollow">http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTdkOTU0NDQzNjVlZDRmN2IxMjYxMTJjODc2NTBkMjI</a>=<br />
He thinks Obama DID have a specific target in mind during this answer, but it was the U.S., and his political instincts are still good enough that he knew THAT answer wasn&#8217;t going to earn him any votes, on balance.</p>
<p>I think that&#8217;s about right &#8211; his first instinct seems to be a moral equivalence, at best&#8230;.note what he came out with on Russia/Georgia.  If he isn&#8217;t seeing both sides as equally bad, it&#8217;s the United States that comes out on the short end of Obama&#8217;s stick.</p>
<p>McCain may not have been as &#8220;thoughtful&#8221; in his answer to this question, but when the excrement hits the fan, he&#8217;s the guy I want at the head of our military!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 2/14 queries in 0.013 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 403/404 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.bookwormroom.com @ 2012-02-10 05:01:05 -->
