Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man

There was one area of answers among all those Barack Obama gave during the Chris Wallace Foxnews interview that stood out for me.  It showed the true character of this man.

Chris Wallace asked Obama the following:  What mistakes have you made? What have you learned about running for president? What have you learned about yourself?

OBAMA: I've learned that I have what I believe is the right temperament for the presidency. Which is, I don't get too high when I'm high and I don't get too low when I'm low. And we've gone through all kinds of ups and downs.

People forget now that I had been written off last summer. People were writing many of the anguished articles that they're not writing after our loss in Pennsylvania. On the other hand, after Iowa, when everybody was sure this was over, I think I was more measured and more cautious.

That I think is a temperamental strength.

In terms of what I've learned or mistakes that I've made, I'm making them all the time and usually it has to do with me talking too much instead of listening. And what I've also learned is how much I've missed my family and my kids and my wife and that's been the biggest hardship of this campaign.

I knew I'd miss them but sometimes you're just - physically you need those two little girls in your arms and that's something I'm looking to fix in the months to come.

************** *******

Being able to handle your emotions during the ups and downs of life, being able to admit you've made mistakes and will again.  And last but not least - showing your love for your family and admitting that they are `number one' in your life - shows the true essence of the man.



Display:


Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (2.00 / 1)

Great answers - he's a cool guy.


by interestedbystander on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:01:06 PM EST

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (2.00 / 1)

I agree that Obama's demeanor is one of his strongest attributes.  He had a good line about his kids and wife.  I thought his answers on the Wright, Ayers, and flag pin questions were pretty solid.

I give his performance on Foxnews an A-.  That million dollar smile of his really serves him well in interview settings.  That he does so well in one-on-one interviews makes me wonder why, as some of his surrogates acknowledge, he doesn't half as well in debate settings.  The answers he gave during his interview with Wallace about the "gotcha" questions were the answers he should have given during the ABC debate.

With that said, I still believe Hill is the stronger general election candidate.  If I were advising her, I'd try to find a way for her to speak in an African-American church prior to the May 6 primaries.  That she only draws 59% of support from African-Americans according to Rasmussen just makes me sick.


by Blazers Edge on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:03:43 PM EST

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (none / 0)

I totally agree with your analysis on the Fox interview. Obama was composed, disarming and answered the majority of questions really well. The line about missing his family was sincere and genuine, as was his admission that he has made plenty of mistakes during this campaign. He wasn't prefect, but he was very, very good.


by jdusek on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 07:19:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (2.00 / 1)

I too thought Obama did well in the debate.  It's the political pundits that claim he didn't answer the questions.

As to your comment about giving more specifics on what you will do -- how can you do that when 45 minutes of the debate was about your personal life?


Coonsey's World http://coonsey.wordpress.com/
by coonbug on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:05:05 PM EST

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (1.00 / 1)

Hillary's LOST most black votes -- they have seen their TRUE colors, sort of speak.

What she needs is to explain why she continues to LIE to voters about Bosnia, NAFTA, Columbia, and not that she's got the Popular Vote -- LIES will get you NO WHERE>


Coonsey's World http://coonsey.wordpress.com/
by coonbug on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:15:31 PM EST

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (none / 0)

uninformed troll.

I guess you forgot all the bills she introduced for the military, work on healthcare, for children, equal rights (for women and AA's/Latinos ESPECIALLY).

It's downright disrespectful.

This thread/diary alone shows how respectful Clinton fans are to Obama, how about some respect in return?


by Jaz on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:22:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (none / 0)

I'll acknowledge that the Jesse Jackson was ill-advised.  But Hill didn't make that statement, it was her husband and it's pretty clear to many that Hill has no control over what he says or does.

As for as her MLK/LBJ comments, I will acknowledge that some African-Americans may find that statement though non-blacks may not be view that statement throught the same lens.

To paint Hill as some type of virulent racist is absurd; she represented the Black Panthers as a law student.  Does she suffer from criminal defense attorney disease?  Yes, I think most objective Hill supporters would acknowledge that she has a tendency to stretch the truth but I'm pretty confident that her body of work over her life demonstrates that she doesn't have a racist bone in her body.  


by Blazers Edge on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:29:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (none / 0)

None the less, her campaign is currently arguing that Barack shouldn't be the candidate because he has some black blood, and is therefore unelectable.

I find it strange how her most committed partisans are unable to see how unforgivable that is to many of us, and so repeat the argument and deepen the wound to her electability.

Imagine the reaction if the Obama campaign were to argue outright that Hillary shouldn't be the candidate because she's a skirt.

This blindness is strange, and strangely fascinating.


by wrb on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:44:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (none / 0)

Please find the quote from Hillary that says Obama shouldn't be the candidate because he has some black blood.
I've never heard that one, I'm afraid.
"Who are you for? That is the wrong question. It should be who is for you?" HRC
by skohayes on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 07:52:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (none / 0)

Why thendo they argue  is he unelectable, due to the power of the racist whites, and our need for them?


by wrb on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 08:11:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (none / 0)

Not honest public scrutiny-- deliberate dishonest attempts to destroy through distortion.

A fine metaphor


by wrb on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 08:46:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (none / 0)

"Swiftboating "is another accurate term

You support Swiftboating, and you always have?


by wrb on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 08:48:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (none / 0)

So she never said that?
I'll bet she never said we needed racist whites either?

"Who are you for? That is the wrong question. It should be who is for you?" HRC
by skohayes on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:59:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I appreciate your anger at this guy. (none / 0)

As an Obama supporter I say that.

But saying this - "how respectful Clinton fans are to Obama" - and on THIS website particularly has made me grimace.  I have no investment in this election and I frequent MyDD and DailyKos for my primary coverage.

I need only point you to THIS comment posted HERE to show you that not all Clinton fans are so charming and amiable to Obama.

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/4/27/1 55231/572/8#8


by Mardarkin on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:55:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's answers: generic BS, no specifics (none / 0)

He set himself up.
Interview was a disaster, showing why Hillary is much better candidate. I can give you that:
Obama is running good campaign and figured out how won caucuses (fraud) and open primaries and how to make blacks to vote against own interests.
But it still showing than he is no match for Hillary and destined for landslide disaster in November, if Democrats want to shoot themselves into foot (feet).
Landslide of lies
by engels on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:37:03 PM EST

Re: Obama's answers: generic BS, no specifics (none / 0)

So, uhh, you didn't actually watch the debate?


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:37:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's answers: generic BS, no specifics (2.00 / 3)

If he is no match for Hillary why is he winning?


Proudly joining the legions of people and states that don't matter on May 20th.
by Obama Independent on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:40:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's answers: generic BS, no specifics (none / 0)

last time i check he lost PA, even he outspent her 4-to-1


Landslide of lies
by engels on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:51:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Uhh (2.00 / 2)

Last time I checked, he outspent her 4-1 because she had burned through all her money and was stiffing her creditors.
Last time I checked, he had cut her lead in half in a state that was demographically made for her.
Last time I checked, he'd won something like 28 states to her 16 or something.
Last time I checked, he led her among elected delegates, popular vote and was bearing down on her in superdelegates.
ооо
by Mumphrey on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:55:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

28 states? 15 caucuses - fraud! (1.00 / 2)

plus multiple pre-manipulated open primaries.
plus at least 5 states where blacks voted just because the color of the skin (90% vote is very good proof for this).

Popular vote is not his after PA, so sorry.
And by the way she got 10 mils in 24 hours after PA, so even money he is not out of reach anymore.

Last thing: don't change the subject: his comments -  were generic...


Landslide of lies
by engels on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:02:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 28 states? 15 caucuses - fraud! (2.00 / 1)

Lets see now....of Hillary's 15 States she's won, it was the WOMAN and SENIOR WOMEN voters giving those wins.....solely because she is a WOMAN and he is BLACK.

That shows her TRUE potential.  I AM WOMAN!!!!


Coonsey's World http://coonsey.wordpress.com/
by coonbug on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:10:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So... (2.00 / 1)

When Bill Clinton won caucuses in 1992, was that a fraud?
You know, Hillary Clinton went into this having heard of caucuses, and maybe even undersanding how they work--or so I would guess. It wasn't some underhanded trick that Obama sprang on her at the last minute. Whether you like it or not, those states chose caucuses over primaries, and they have set rules, and everybody, so far as I know, played by them. They're just as legitimate as primaries, even if your candidate lost them.
And, yes, some states have a lot of black voters. I for one am glad that, after 300 years or so of having no say in life, black people now have the right to vote and use it. Hillary Clinton presumably knew that black people vote; they turned out for her husband strongly enough that he won Georgia once and Tennessee and Louisiana twice. Should we have given those electoral votes to Bush and Dole, since black people's votes are obviously unworthy and tainted?
I get so sick of hearing people whine about how "black people all vote for Obama," and "Clinton would be winning if it weren't for the black people," and shit like that.
I actually know some black people, believe it or not, and they aren't weird, or scary, or stupid, and, well, you wouldn't believe it, but hell, they're just like us! Why black people and white people have even been able to lawfully marry and have children in every state for more than 40 years! Who would have thought it?
And do you know what else? They have just as much a right to vote--however they want--as I have
ооо
by Mumphrey on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:14:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And by the way (2.00 / 1)

I wasn't changing the subject.
I didn't see the interview, so I don't know how hazy or vague or generic his answers might have been.
I was answering your post directly, and that had to do with Clinton's having won Pennsylvania.
ооо
by Mumphrey on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:18:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's answers: generic BS, no specifics (2.00 / 3)

And yet he continues to be winning. If we are nominating the President of Pennsylvania then you'd have a point. But we are nominating a President of the United States.

And what is with the constant fish tale about how much he spent? The ratio was 2.4 to 1. Standard rounding rules would make that 2 to 1. 3 to 1 would be a charitable description of the difference. From what nether region do you pull 4 to 1?


Proudly joining the legions of people and states that don't matter on May 20th.
by Obama Independent on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:57:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's answers: generic BS, no specifics (2.00 / 2)

Furthermore, the Clinton campaign does not give the American people enough credit to ask WHY he's outspent her.  

It's not because he's got the most maxed out donors, it's not because he made big loans to his own campaign out of his vast personal weath, and its not because he's got the most PAC money.

Obama outspent Clinton because he has been very successful at raising money from lots of people in all walks of life.  By the time this primary is over, Obama will claim close to 2 MILLION donors, averaging less than $100 a piece.

It's pretty funny, considering how much money the Clinton campaign had at the start of this campaign, that they are now making hay out of Obama's success on this front.


by Pragmatic Left on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:15:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually, (none / 0)

That's "'nuther region," not "nether region." As in, "I don't like the facts, so I'm gonna pull a whole 'nuther fact I like better outta my ass!"


ооо
by Mumphrey on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:21:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's answers: generic BS, no specifics (2.00 / 2)

BTW..your statement also means he OUTRAISED her 4-1......which campaign is attracting more interest?


"I am standing with Barack Obama to say, `Yes, we can!'" Hillary Clinton 6/7/08
by feliks on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 06:45:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's answers: generic BS, no specifics (none / 0)

No, he hasn't outraised her 4:1. Less than 2:1, actually.
But you know what's really interesting? He has outraised McCain 3:1.
"Who are you for? That is the wrong question. It should be who is for you?" HRC
by skohayes on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 07:58:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (2.00 / 1)

"it's pretty clear to many that Hill has no control over what he says or does"

This statement alone should WORRY Hillary voters.


Coonsey's World http://coonsey.wordpress.com/
by coonbug on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 04:52:44 PM EST

Re: Obama vs Wallace: Comments True Essense of Man (2.00 / 1)

So, a famous basketball player in college spends hardly nothing to tell folks WHO HE IS.  Another UNKNOWN student spends hundreds of dollars telling folks who 'he/she' is.

You call this UNFAIR?

Sounds like something Bush would say.


Coonsey's World http://coonsey.wordpress.com/
by coonbug on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:16:33 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.