PatrickEdwardMurray,
Drugs aren't a monolithic blithe on everyone that come in contact with them. There's a very good chance your friend/acquaintance's life would have turned out the same regardless of his activities, there's no real way to know. I do not advocate drug use nor to I condemn ALL those that have tried them. It's a rather subjective matter, if drugs aren't your thing by all means avoid them at all cost but don't feign to know how others will handle them and refrain from passing judgment - less ye be judged.

And one more thing:

I have a college friend who did drugs in school.
I never knew what he was doing or how much as I wasn't that close a friend and never saw him doing it either.

Ran across him a few years ago through our Alma Mater and found out that he had been through 2 or 3 divorces already.

Sadly, I have to report that he couldn't remember me or most of his college days either.

That's what drug use will get you...

So, don't tell me about having Courage or perhaps is it really the other way around?

Those who partake of illicit drugs don't have the Courage to face the world?

Think about not having your memories...not having those good memories?

Stephenthomson,

You must be joking, right?

Courage to use drugs?

Sorry, but in today's world, what with drug testing being the norm before employment and stricter drug testing being used in some Corporations, I find it incredible that anyone would be so terribly naive to assume they won't get caught.

I only hope, for your sake, that you are just kidding because in all kindness and seriousness, getting caught
is not going to win you kudos:(

People said they liked GW Bush because her was the candidate they'd most like to have a beer with, and now you're telling Obama to dumb it down. Obama is on point, concise, intelligent, sincere. What's wrong with that?
I don't want to have a beer with the guy. I want him to help fix what's been broken these past 7 years.

You may be right stephen, but I just really believe that the voters are a lot different now.

But then again we've all heard stories of abused spouses who keep going back to their abusers time after time after time.

I choose to believe that a lot of voters have woken up to the Republicans, but it does seem like no matter how many times the blue collar workers get kicked in the balls by the GOP they keep coming back for more. Bush buys them flowers, says he didn't mean it and they make up. A couple months later WHAM!

Hopefully this time will be different.

But let's not discount the very real possibility that McCain may simply keel over halfway through the general.

I mean, the kind is reeeeeally fucking old.

good points, crob, but I dont have any faith in republicans.

because, they're republicans goddamit! and it doesn't matter who the nominee is. They're on his side because they share the same denomination.

I think it will be surprisingly close. And considering we thought Bush was a gonner in 2004. well.....

Let's not extrapolate too much from the CURRENT battle.

The Hillary people looooove to insist that if Hillary doesn't become the nominee that they will all vote for McCain.

I don't buy it.

People keep insisting McCain will be "tough to beat!" as well and use that scare tactic to convince us to vote for Hillary.

When I read the words "McCain" and "tough to beat" the needle gets buried on my "WTF?" meter.

McCain is for a HUGELY unpopular war.

McCain is opposed to any significant changes to our healthcare system -- which is HUGELY unpopular.

McCain is incapable of getting the Sunni and Shitte straight and constantly confuses the two. (Creating a minor credibility problem on his application for Commander and Chief)

McCain has a voting recoding that would be embarrassing for even a typical Republican.

So, no, absolutely NO ONE from the Democratic party (and that includes fundamentalist worshipers of Saint Hillary) will ever vote for McCain. If Obama were the nominee they would vote for him over McCain without hesitation.

Once Obama (the cerebral assassin) begins debating the drooling, senile, barely lucid McCain on the national stage it will become quite clear to the entire nation that McCain is on the exact wrong side of every major issue important to voters.

Every time Obama makes a cogent point about the urgent need to make improvements to our badly failing healthcare system --- exactly what is McCain going to say in rebuttal that will make him "tough to beat"?

"I'm a war hero!"

That's it?

People are losing their homes, people are dying because insurance is denying them healthcare, troops are still mired in Iraq which is bleeding our national treasury to nothing --- but because McCain has the ability to sputter "I was once a POW" we're supposed to believe that hundreds of thousands of blue collar workers in Pennsylvania will say, "That's good enough for me! Sure I'm against the war and, okay, so I lost my house because of a shady subprime loan and my wife died of cancer because the insurance company refused treatment -- but how can I vote for Obama when there is a POW running for President? Make mine McCain!"

Sorry, but I just don't buy it and no other Democrat should either.

Either Obama or Hillary could easily, easily, easily, beat McCain in a general election.

Your crazy, anybody can perceive anything as anything he can't change everything in a different way for everyone.

My parents have MBA's and doctorates, Pat, and they're voting Obama. And may I add, that anyone who scoffs at experimental drug use obviously hasn't had the courage and intellectual curiosity to try it themselves.

THE problem? THE problem is that poor uneducated zenophobic white trash dont have half a brain to know what's good for them.

seeker561,

Yes you are right, there has always been an anti-intellectual bent in our political system.

Some folks, like Bill Clinton, have personalities that gloss over the intelligence and make him Charismatic so that it doesn't bother folks.

And it's not just that he doesn't have Blue Collar workers either...he's not getting all those folks who have degrees like myself.

Problem is that he hasn't lived his life as he should have to NOT have problems that could hurt his political career.

Now I'm sure that some liberals scoff at a little drug use but most "Real" folks don't..we know about the real world and the real world doesn't like drug use.

When you become a candidate for national office, it helps if you've lived a fairly clean life.

Rage, Whatever you do don't hold back. Sometimes you are so quiet and timid. You go girl, everything you said is true. The man has the morals of an ally cat.

Blazeboy,
Perhaps that was awkwardly worded. My point wasn't to condemn Pres. Clinton or anyone for getting their buzz on. I was trying to illustrate the same petty arguments can and have been used against all the candidates but for some odd reason they are acts of high treason where Sen. Obama is concerned. Why is that?

krag, Obama may be winning, but we're only talking about the Democratic primary. A general election is much, much different! I mean, the American people elected Bush twice (let's just take the arguments that they didn't elect him at all as read, shall we? because that's not relevant here), for Christ's sake!

If Obama gets the nom, he MUST start drinking beer and shooting guns and pandering if he wants to win in November. Period. He would do well to work on his bowling, too. He should also try to smile more and to be more sentimental. All of this stuff is going to be tough for him to do - but McCain is going to do it like a champ.

Hi rabidlemur, In reference to your comment, I'm just wondering if you took the time to read the article or just read the title. If your had read my post, you'll see there is no reason to get so defensive. In fact, I am an Obama Supporter. I am part of the www.EyesOnObama.com group and I invite you to join our community (blog, forum, comments) and bring some contribution in electing Obama as our future President.

Given the fact that he's winning I think he should just keep on doing what he's doing. eldamon is right, some people are going to seek out a reason not to like him, and you know what? The are going to find something no matter what he does. I think he should continue to just be himself and campaign as hard and a smart as he has all along. He didn't get an insurmountable lead in pledged delegates by rubbing most people the wrong way. But as eldamon suggests...maybe some people just don't want to be rubbed the right way (is that a saying?). I think it's best not to try.

Isn't it funny how many of Obama's supporters tend to be the younger, educated and more affluent voters. Now if he has to guzzle down a beer, put on an accent and go shoot deer to relate to the "people", then he's going to have a problem. Perhaps this time, like last time, choosing the intellectual elitist snob would be the wisest decision.

eldamon, it's interesting that you talk about Hillary's being married to a man who admitted taking drugs in college (= bad thing) then you turn around and say that Obama admitted to taking drugs in high school (= not a problem).

How can you condemn someone on the one hand for what *her husband* did many years ago and on the other hand, when your own *candidate* did the same thing you dismiss it out of hand?

That seems pretty ridiculous to me, and rather dishonest, but it shows how we all have blinders on for our own candidate which, to some degree I suppose, is natural.

I agree that a lot of the who's up/who's down discussion is inflated by the media and that Obama certainly appears to be ahead at this point, probably too far ahead for Hillary to catch.

But I also think that Obama's personality *is* a problem. The places where Obama wins overwhelmingly are of two types: either, (1), predominantly black or, (2), predominantly liberal elite in terms of Democratic voters. (Look at the Pennsylvania county breakdown map for Clinton and Obama if you don't believe me, as just one example.)

But the person who wins in November MUST come across as a "real person," in the same way that W. J. Clinton or G. W. Bush did no matter how much of an elitist those guys actually were/are. This is how politics in America works. If Obama can't pull this off, all the black voters and liberal elites in the country will not be able to save him. That's just the simple math of it.

I've made this kind of comment before and been accused of "underestimating the voters." Pshaw. Sorry, but the voters in this country, as far as I'm concerned, cannot be underestimated. The only people who think so are the elites (like us) who seem to forget about what the rest of the country is like.

I'm just saying: do we want a Democrat in the White House or not?

The title of the article is "what I think Obama should do"
This isn't news, this is someone's opinion.

The media doesn't want Obama, that's a very good sign. Should make people want him even more. What has the media done for you lately? They don't report the news that's for sure.

The last time a "real person" got elected over a so called elitist we got George W Bush. I want someone smarter than me and everyone else for a change. I don't care if he/she thinks they can walk on freakin' water. I want them to have a massive mental capacity and the temperament to use it.

Too many americans just don't like smart people, particularly thiose that are well spoken and articulate.

I want someone that is smart, has integrity, vision for the future, has a plan to get us out of Iraq, and no plans to attack Iran, Thinks diplomacy with everyone is the best course of action. I want someone that got where he is because of his own hard work and talents. I want someone that isn't married to the person that signed NAFTA into law. I want someone with a decent health care plan that won't include attaching anyone's paycheck if they can't pay. I want a person that has lived a normal working family's life so they have a grasp on reality. I want someone that recognizes the truth and tells it. Mostly I want change from the way things have been for far too many years. Obama 08!

So all the people who don't like him are just misinterpreting him? It couldn't be that he really is arrogant and rude? Maybe you are so desperate for a change from Dubya that you are misinterpreting Obama's arrogance as intelligence.

I'n not saying Obama isn't smart but like it or not he rubs a lot of people th wrong way. Personally I find him annoying. I want a person who is real, not someone who says nonsense like he is going to change the world etc etc. Just tell me that you will work to strengthen the dollar, and increase job growth by providing incentives to businesses that hire in America. I'm definitely not a republican but he could take a lesson from Ron Paul in this area.

Is it possible that some are looking for an "excuse" to not support this particular candidate for some odd reason? Much better arguments can be made against Senators McCain and Clinton using the very same criteria and yet some continue to harp on one certain candidate, why is that?

Sen. McCain voted against the King amendment to make the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King's birthday a national holiday. He was part of the Keating 5 and a known friend and associate of a convicted felon. He has accepted and embraced endorsements from two controversial clergy men who have made anti gay, semitic and catholic remarks. And, he was introduced on two occasions by one person making reference to Sen. Obama's middle name implying he is not American/Christian and another disparagingly calling Sen. Obama "Tiger Woods". All these are a matter of public record, resent enough to be relevant and directly connected to Sen. McCain.

Sen. Clinton voted for the current war basically to further her political ambitions. She supports NAFTA and trade with Columbia when it's politically or monetarily expedient. Her husband is a former president convicted of perjury, impeached and lied to the American people as well as admitting to taking drugs in college. She's been involved in questionable land and legal deals and flat out lied about her trip to Bosnia where she wasn't wearing a flag pin by the way - again to foster her political goals. Once again these are all a matter of public record and not subject to debate.

On the other hand, we have Sen. Obama who is getting grief over a flag pin and how he chooses to stand during the national anthem. He admitted to using drugs in high school - much like most of us and over 25 years ago. His pastor made some controversial and provocative remarks which Sen. Obama has categorically and unequivocally denounced and has nothing to do with his point of view or the content of his character.

Conceding the point they all have "issues", for the sake of argument, why are Sen. Obama's issues singled out as particularly heinous? Why is his patriotism and religion question and why are people looking to legitimize excuses for not supporting him?

I guess he needs to have a beer? I hope he's not a wine drinker, that would be too elite.

While i realize that he is in the front, i still see where jackie is coming from. Somethings not clicking right now, but it mainly had to deal with voting population in Pennsylvania. Obama still represents the change we need though, and once the democratic party stops bloodying itself most will realize it.

WTF? How do you figure he has a problem? , last I checked he was leading in the polls and was the front runner...