digg

Join DiggAbout

Barack Obama's response to Bush's final State of the Union watch!

youtube.com — Barack Obama responds to George W. Bush's final State of the Union address.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • morningmatters, on 01/29/2008, -132/+39That was a quick response! I suspect the script for this video shoot was prepared before Bush's speech. Has Bush became this predictable?
    • bgraves20, on 01/29/2008, -1/+77His speech was released long before he gave it.
      • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -14/+1So?

        I could have written a rebuttal speech long before hearing what Bush had to say also. And been dead-correct in what I said in "response" to what Bush said.
    • Peko, on 01/29/2008, -3/+32Even if Bush's speech was not verbatim pre released, I would presume any politician would be prepared for the types of themes that would come up. I'm sure Obama has an entire folder of "responses to the current administration" type ideas and segues ready to go.

      I'm a little disapointed that Obama didnt go for better lighting and shot composition, but I like how a candidate is replying quickly via teh intarwebs. Nice touch.

      • fyngyrz, on 01/29/2008, -1/+12"I'm a little disapointed that Obama didnt go for better lighting and shot composition"

        Oh yeah? Well, *I* am disappointed Obama didn't have half-naked dancing girls front and center. Only exceeded by my regret he didn't have fully naked dancing girls front and center. And a good rock band to back him up; and spaceships! And an 800-number we could call to win a million dollars! And performing bears!

        Oh... wait... you mean we were supposed to pay attention to what he said? Huh!


        • Peko, on 01/29/2008, -2/+3I think you might have a point, but I can't remember. What's that 1-800 number? Am I too late?
      • scotticus, on 01/29/2008, -0/+6I like that he posed with books instead of going hunting or something equally ***** stupid.

        It's time for a president who reads.
        • funkytaco, on 01/30/2008, -1/+1Bush does read. It's just that he reads them upside down, so they give him a headache.
    • LostnTransition, on 01/29/2008, -1/+7And for that matter why digg morningmatters down? I believe any insult to bush is a compliment for this country. Digg him back up!
    • drakethegreat, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1That was a quick response! I suspect the script to this comment was prepared before watching Obama's video. Has morningmatters become predictable?
  • edward9145, on 01/29/2008, -65/+194Obama Nation 2008
    • kcdstudios, on 01/29/2008, -8/+34People's nation ftw.
      • orxor, on 01/29/2008, -24/+13You mean peoples republic of america right? With socialized health care and the fact that Obama voted for REAL ID. I do think that he's the best of the dems left in the race but that's not saying much.
        • nirav72, on 01/29/2008, -8/+18You do realize that you already have been carrying a REAL ID long before it was required right? Your driver license is a REAL ID and will be a considered a REAL ID. Dumbass.
        • zzzpoohzzz, on 01/29/2008, -2/+17if i'm not mistaken... everyone in the senate voted for the REAL ID... can't just single out obama
          • ManOfVirtues, on 01/29/2008, -0/+12This is true, because the Real ID Act was tacked on to another bill regarding homeland defense spending that the Senate did not have time to read nor completely comprehend.

            @nirav72... That isn't necessarily so. Currently your drivers license is only kept at the state level. The Real ID act would create a file on you and everything you do, all the way down to your medical records that would be free for government agencies to access. The problem is when you have a database of this size where everything about you is listed it becomes a one stop shop for hackers and identity thieves. 17 states have already passed legislation stating that they would not take part in the Real ID program including my state of Nebraska.
          • card51short, on 01/29/2008, -5/+3"if i'm not mistaken... everyone in the senate voted for the REAL ID... can't just single out obama"

            Is everyone running for president?
        • ncairns, on 01/29/2008, -2/+8God I'm tired of that lie.
      • Dustmuffins, on 01/29/2008, -2/+1That's not cliché or anything...
      • SpykerSpeed, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1Yes, for the common purpose... the common good... of all. And our Charismatic Leader.
      • smackjack, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1I didn't know The Rock was running...
      • YJ2k2, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1The People's Republic of America?
    • Araxen, on 01/29/2008, -10/+6#politics on EFnet. Educate this channel about Obama!
      • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -0/+10Are you kidding? You can't bring up ideas in there. It's not allowed.

        Those ***** consider WorldNetDaily and FreeRepublic to be commie liberal sites.

        I used to be a frequent visitor there. At least until the IP bannings.

        They've gotten so paranoid that if they dont' know you when you walk in, not only do you not get a +v, but you'll be lucky not to be banned.

        It's nothing more than a clique of fascist who collect there to pat each other on the back about how "hardcore" conservative they can be.
    • Sarevok9, on 01/29/2008, -23/+10Honestly I am rather unimpressed once again with Obamas words, allow me to elaborate. Obama often stands on his voting record, yet leads the Democratic candidates in missed votes. In this video, he says that he would 'immediately begin the 'responsible withdrawl' of troops from iraq'; which thereby, directly contradicts what he said in the 2007 debate where he said (paraphrased via 'http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/09/27/democ ... "He says he would start pulling troops out right away, but he won't commit to a 2013 deadline for total withdrawal".

      Once again he speaks of unifying the middle class, when his voting record shows the exact opposite. I see a rift in what he says and what he does.

      Once again I am forced to vote Ron Paul because he is the only candidate that I don't see grasping at straws and flip-flopping like a fish out of water.
      • babar77, on 01/29/2008, -2/+14Again someone trying to spin things. When he wasn't campaigning for President, he had one of the lowest missed vote rates. Now that he's campaigning - and in a hard fought campaign - he's missing no more votes than any other candidate on the campaign trail. When he's president, he'll have a lot more say over how things get done.

        For the LAST damn time, the troops aren't coming home until there's a democratic president, or enough support in congress to overcome a veto. Once congress authorized the war, it's a lot harder for them to bring the troops back when the President doesn't want it.

        Maybe because Ron Paul is making his votes and not out on the campaign trail is the reason he's not getting more votes.
        • ssn697, on 01/29/2008, -1/+5Ron Paul is the king of missed votes. 28% during the current Congress...
        • Sarevok9, on 01/29/2008, -9/+4Once again someone trying to spin the facts against Ron Paul by calling him a 'generic republican' and trying to classify him with the likes of Fooliani, and Romney. I also noted that you didn't defend the voting record of your candidate of choice, a simple google search will tell you that if you elect him you're just going to get more of the same.
        • lajaw, on 01/29/2008, -5/+2The troops won't come home with a Democrat president either. Our troops are scattered across the globe, pushing the Democrat and neo-con agenda. If either are elected, it will not change.
          • chicofaraby, on 01/29/2008, -3/+5A majority of Congressional Democrats voted against the illegal invasion. And the "neo-cons" are Republicans. Just like Ron Paul is a Republican.
          • lajaw, on 01/29/2008, -1/+3@chico...........you are a parrot...............Paul is a Republican. He is not a neo-con.
          • chicofaraby, on 01/29/2008, -2/+2I didn't claim Paul was a neo-con. I merely pointed out that the neo-cons are Republicans and Paul is a Republican. Which of those points is incorrect?
          • lajaw, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1You are wrong. The neo-cons are not Republicans. They are more like Democrats.
        • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -1/+4Making his votes? HAHAHAHAHA. Here's a list of just the ones he's missed. http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/member ...

          The list is ***** HUGE. Yeah, he's in Washing working, that's why he's not getting votes. Uh-huh.

          On the first page alone, he's missed 100 votes since 11/07/2007. And there are PAGES and PAGES more. Considering each page appears to be formatted to show 100 results, he's missed HUNDREDS of votes. Not a few, not a handful, but HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of votes.

          Yeah, he's at the office working. That's why he's not getting votes. Keep telling yourself that.

          A showing of "not voting" next to your name on an issue isn't something to brag about.
      • enchantedsky, on 01/29/2008, -7/+6Ron Paul is a loser, he is not going to win. He is barely getting in 4th place, if not last in every primary.

        Oh by the way, he is a REPUBLICAN, meaning he does not believe in evolution, no stem cell research, etc ------ in other words, voting for Ron Paul means one step back for this country (but your federal government will be abolished and local government prevail, which is probably what you want)

        Go Obama!
      • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -2/+9Yeah, look at all these missed votes! There are pages of them! The first page only goes back to November. There are pages and pages after that. http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/member ...

        Oh wait! Those are Ron Paul's missed votes.....

        Sorry for the confusion.
    • joshuaer, on 01/29/2008, -5/+20If obama only does 1/4 of what he says he wants to do he will be a far better president then bush! On that note just imagine how great it would be if i did every thing he said he wants to do.
      • 666dorado, on 01/29/2008, -2/+5imagine how great i would be if i do everything i say i want to do.
      • Malevolant, on 01/29/2008, -2/+1So then you're voting on him based on hypotheticals? Your not basing your vote on what he hasn't done, but what he says he'll do? Ridiculous.
      • kesam, on 01/29/2008, -1/+4At this point, a dead horse would be a better president than Bush, so that's not saying much.
        I do support him though (Obama, not Bush). He wasn't my favourite but he's the only mainstream candidate worth voting for.
      • Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4Not everything. He wants to cut off funding from NASA and stop our return to the moon. As a Student who is studying aerospace engineering in college and was inspired to want to work for NASA after learning about the moon landings in 5th grade, I am opposed to Obama's space policy.

        Though I do like him on everything else and want to vote for him, I just thought I'd throw that out there.
        • Dokkodo, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1The Apollo program went to the moon 6 times, the last time in 1972. Don't you think it's time to aim a little higher and spend that money on trips to more distant planets or other research and development?
        • radix2, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1Even the NASA scientists don't want to go to the moon. They have better ideas for how the funds can be spent...
        • chijim70, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1Sorry but at present with our economy as it is and people losing their homes left and right I could really give a ***** about our space aspirations and would be overjoyed to see NASA eliminated if the money made it's equivalent amount of people not homeless and not without healthcare where it is really needed. I'm sure you can understand that NASA be damned if it means somebodies Mom or child gets an operation they need to live more years.
          NASA, us policing the globe, useless bloated organizations like the IRS and Dept. of education, etc. seem insane to me when there are homeless, hungry, and sick without healthcare americans. Make sense of that for me...
      • godseyeview, on 01/30/2008, -1/+1sorry but we never went to the moon. that was a Disney movie u saw.
    • kodax, on 01/29/2008, -14/+9Sorry, Obama is a populist telling the largest voting groups what they want to hear. The message I am getting is big government..but where is this money going to come from to sustain it?
      • OrangeTide, on 01/29/2008, -2/+6from us "rich" people who have jobs and college degrees.
        • Garbagio, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1Currently, all of us talented slaves have either debt, or no debt. That's not real money! At this rate, you won' t have money in the eyes of the international world as they call in on the promises that the paper dollar is supposed to buy. When your Obama-built fantasyland crashes in on you, you'll merely embolden the rift between politicians and the people they 'serve'. Have you heard Obama say ANYTHING that remotely describes the transfers of wealth needed to alter course? Has he named names? Does his catch phrases actually echo a sound strategy for ANYTHING? How will he improve world relations as well as create jobs that will go hand in hand with the rest of the international community? He's still commited to the Iraq war. AIPAC and his campaign are busy diddling each other to push for an aggressive confrontation of Iran. All I hear from this brilliant speaker is just a slew of visualizations and call outs to the gullible people who don't even care to know the details. They just want the end result because a likable person says it can happen.
          • OrangeTide, on 01/30/2008, -0/+2it will be business as usual. by Change he means he won't rock the boat.
      • rootofunity, on 01/29/2008, -2/+2arent we supposed to have Polulist's in an elected gov't?? Isn't that the whole point? Would you rather have a candidate that says the complete opposite of the majority of polulation? How would that person get elected?
        • janeuner, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3They wouldn't. That was the original purpose of the electoral system.
        • bosssmiley, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1Populists are people who get into power by telling people what they think the people want to hear. Sometimes that isn't the best choice for the country, even though it sounds good to the electorate. There are occasions when what you *want* to hear isn't what you *need* to hear.
          Cases in point: Tony Blair, a used car salesman of a politician if ever there was one. A man who realised that merely claiming he was going to do something about a cause was just as electorally effective as actually doing something. Voted in on a pseudo-landslide 3 times; left the country more f*cked than when he got into power.
      • davidrools, on 01/29/2008, -2/+2Ending the war would save $11 Billion per month, getting rid of the tax breaks for the rich and large businesses, taxes on companies that outsource overseas, while giving tax breaks to the middle class.
        It might sound like big government but that's not necessarily the case. Useless programs might be cut. What seems like smaller government now is just the result of spending tons of money on private contractors who end up costing us more and providing substandard services.
        • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1The top 5% pay over 55% of the taxes the federal government collects.

          How exactly do think that is a tax "break"? I'm dying to know.
          • ViperX116, on 01/30/2008, -1/+1If they have most of the money then of course the majority of the taxes will come from them. Duh!
        • dareNmc, on 01/30/2008, -1/+0the richest 1% hold about one-third of all privately held wealth in the United States and pay 13% of the taxes. (I couldn't find stats on the top 5%)
          (not saying whats fair, just something to think about.)
    • yaDiggitDiggit, on 01/29/2008, -6/+11OK I don't get why people like Obama so much he just voted for the REAL ID act, hes pure war time and he won't resolve the issue of the crashing dollar. you are just gonna get more of the same BS
      • orxor, on 01/29/2008, -1/+10He's charming, young, good looking, and speaks well that's what people really want in a president, not someone that will solve the countries problems.
      • toogle1234, on 01/30/2008, -1/+1Your statement is completely false, he did not vote in favor of the 07/26/2007 REAL ID Funding Bill, and its unlikely you even understand what you are saying by stating that the USD is crashing. The theory that the USD is falling in value is still up for debate, as is the likelyhood we are falling into a recession. The stimulus package that is being put into effect by the current administration and the current efforts by the fed under bernanke will most likely fix the economy before Bush gets out of office. Do a little research before you post next time and don't just talk out of your ass.
        • Garbagio, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1A little research? How about the value of the DOW in August of 1929 being at an all-time high before crashing utterly from a value of 320 points per share to 34 points in a matter of 3 months. A stimulus package fixing the economy?!!?!?!? A stimulus package was introduced 1 month into the first crash that was the Great Depression. WHY DO YOU THINK THE ECONOMY EVEN TOOK A MAJOR DIP IN THE FIRST PLACE if everything is as sound as your leaders are telling you?! Credit nowadays is based off of money that doesn't exist! Banks inflate the credit based on NOTHING and print money whenever it's needed, devaluing the dollar you earn, by a bit each and every day. The international community is beginning to fear that the paper money doesn't match any real tradable substance such as gold, rice, poultry, etc. When that fear turns to an outright conversion from Dollars to a more sound currency for the primary energy source on the planet (oil) then the country will be broke broke BROKE. There have already been 3 countries that have followed suit on this with discussions worldwide already commencing on the switch from the US Dollar to the Euro. Forget a stimulus package a la 1929; this economy needs a new heart transplant. Obama just wants to put another bandaid on the already scabbed over and infected heart that is America's economy so it'll burst when he's not in charge of it anymore. Have fun with your beleagured system. Nothing short of a R3voLution will save you if Obama gets the seat.
    • rentmitchum, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4Usually you have to vote between some douche and some turd, but you just pick one and hope for the best.
    • j1ggy, on 01/29/2008, -5/+4Wow does that guy ever have big ears.
    • Malevolant, on 01/29/2008, -6/+10Sheep Nation 2008, style over substance.
      • Garbagio, on 01/29/2008, -1/+4The last three words are so accurate; it's damning.
        The first three words are so vindictive; it's sobering.
      • ferrite, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3MacBook Air Anyone?
    • digihoffa, on 01/30/2008, -2/+2Obama & The CFR: http://www.nowpublic.com/politics/obama-cfr
  • Kinglouis3, on 01/29/2008, -37/+352Excellent response to Bush's State of the Union Fairy Tale.
    • diggingaround, on 01/29/2008, -12/+1.... I just don't like the last sentence:
      "....I wish to be..."
      I would really like to hear from him "I will be" or "I really want to be"..
      To wish something - doesn't lead you anywhere.
      • bendingbeats, on 01/29/2008, -0/+6he said "that's the kind of president i HOPE to be"
      • diggingaround, on 01/29/2008, -6/+1Yes.... and I hope I will be a multimillionaire soon.... hope is weak... hope is past.. decisive, direct and immediate actions are what this country needs... not HOPE!
      • Synova, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1BFD!
    • 1kewldude, on 01/29/2008, -9/+2I cant believe anyone actually sat thru and listened to this crap - The Matrix was on from before the speech started till after it was over - and i'd rather watch that for the gazillionth time than listen to this fuknut spew more lies.....
  • MarkusGarvey, on 01/29/2008, -14/+58where am i.....and what am i doing in this hand-basket?...now... half of you stand up an clap......
    • SimianSamurai, on 01/29/2008, -1/+3Hahaha
    • rz8472, on 01/29/2008, -0/+13Speaking of clapping... Huffington Post is saying that Hillary rose up and clapped when Bush said that "the surge is working and Al Qaeda knows it" while Obama did not. Does that indicate something about the candidates?

      (Of course, HP has a pro-Obama bias so take that into mind)
      • kolobcreek, on 01/29/2008, -1/+4He seemed to be playing off peoples discontent with the president than actually what the president said. If I remember correctly the president called on congress to pass laws to fix a lot of those problems. As for ear marks. Senator Obama should take leadership in the senate and do something to stop the ear marks. If he's such a great leader why doesn't he do something about it now? Why does he have to wait till he's the President to take care of business?
  • portermason, on 01/29/2008, -22/+321I love what he says at the end, of instead of having half the country not care, instead of having half the chamber clap, let's have a president who we can all believe in. Hint: that's not Hillary.
    • astrosmash, on 01/29/2008, -31/+14America would be very lucky to have either Obama or the Clintons in the White House, especially considering the mess the next administration will inherit.
      • Groovemaster, on 01/29/2008, -9/+5Not as lucky as AIPAC will be to have Obama or the Clintons in the White House.
        • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -2/+2They'd MUCH rather have Trudi Jewliani, or John "bomb Iran" McCain.

          Careful where you swing that AIPAC brush. You'll splatter Kristol, Wolfowitz, Pearle and the PNAC group, and they don't appreciate "trickle-down"
      • ventralnet, on 01/29/2008, -1/+3Inherit and contribute to... its a vicious cycle
    • ferrite, on 01/29/2008, -13/+6I don't know why people are digging you down. For all the talk Obama has made I haven't heard one concrete plan or idea on how to fix things, only that "things will be better".

      Better how?
      • dwrecktion, on 01/29/2008, -2/+7check out barackobama.com, baby.
        • ferrite, on 01/29/2008, -5/+2No offense, but why should I do the equivalent of asking for his platform when other candidates actually use their airtime to state theirs?
          He's a charismatic speaker, I'll give him that, but he should be telling people what he's going to do during the debates, during his interviews, during his victory speeches, not saying "to know exactly what you're voting for check out my website".
          • bagboyrebel, on 01/29/2008, -1/+3right, why should you have to do any personal research? All of the canidates should seek you out and specifically tell you every detail of their plans whenever they speak.
          • ferrite, on 01/29/2008, -1/+0Its a shame that a media-darling like Obama hasn't had the opportunity to share with us his plans in a public setting like the TV, Radio, or Newspaper.
            There was a time when politicians had to actually state what they stood for in the public eye instead of hiding behind a website.

            Since when did it stop being a politician's responsibility to tell you why they want your vote?

            I know where Clinton, Huckabee, Romney, McCain, and the Ron Paul Spambots claim to stand.

            Keep hiding behind empty promises, dodged questions, and platitudes.
    • DEIx15x8, on 01/29/2008, -12/+5Good idea, that's why I won't vote Obama.
      • dwrecktion, on 01/29/2008, -1/+5who is the unifying candidate then?
        • lajaw, on 01/29/2008, -2/+3There will be no unifying candidate until things in this country get much worse. You have the liberals and the neo-cons working to take our rights and our freedoms away which is opposite of the principle foundation of our country. Then you have the freedom and liberty lovers. The twain shall never become one. They are polar opposites.
  • Dohko_Xar, on 01/29/2008, -43/+341George W. Bush has only proved one thing: monkeys can talk.
    • martalli, on 01/29/2008, -3/+71but they can't say "nuclear".
      • zzzpoohzzz, on 01/29/2008, -0/+14he actually said it correctly last night... first time i've heard that...
        and then he got that stupid ass grin on his face like he actually accomplished something
        • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1He figures he at least better start pronouncing it correctly before using them, since it's about the only weapon we have left against Iran.

          And he DOES plan on going to war with Iran before him and Cheney leave office. The minute Iran officially changes their bourse to the Euro, the invasion begins.
        • erbazzone, on 01/29/2008, -4/+1[this comment is here only to make a new nasted comment]
      • ChromeWalnut, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1Actually, GW's infamous pronunciation of "nucular" is an acceptable one according to Merriam and Webster and various other dictionaries. I don't understand it personally, but its true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucular
    • djm5586, on 01/29/2008, -10/+3Lol dude that is so true, tell me more
    • GloomyYardGnome, on 01/29/2008, -22/+4Oh I get it now, George Bush = monkey/Hitler. 5 gold stars for you!
    • KarthVader, on 01/29/2008, -1/+12If George Bush has proven that monkeys can talk for the past two presidential terms, does that mean evolution is no longer theory?
    • digitalarcanum, on 01/29/2008, -5/+4"George W. Bush has only proved one thing: SHAVED monkeys can talk."

      fix'd
      • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3"I know about your wife, Gus......"

        /Gooney-googoo!
      • rpatel11, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3she cannot climb steps. I bet she climb the ***** out of a tree though
    • pizpot, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4I thought you said "money can talk."
    • Akintunde, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4XD and I thought I was the only one referring to him as a monkey...
    • dbsmoker, on 01/29/2008, -0/+9Please stop insulting monkeys. Thank you.
    • LostnTransition, on 01/29/2008, -0/+2And he flings poo SO WELL!
    • rz8472, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1Hey, Darwin (the monkey from Wild Thornberrys) resents the implication that George can speak better than he can!
    • satyr9us, on 01/29/2008, -1/+0Any chimp can play human for a day/ fancy himself a real decision-maker /then run for office on election day/ use his opposable thumbs to iron his uniform/ deploy more troops than salt in a shaker/ but it's a jungle when war is made/ you'll panic and throw your own ***** at the enemy-- Rilo Kiley
    • kevinwiz, on 01/30/2008, -0/+2If Obama was the man being called monkey, just imagine the extent to which the race card would be pulled lol.
  • tucsonsun13, on 01/29/2008, -21/+100Everyone applauding during the SOTN speech is guilty.....
    • felman87, on 01/29/2008, -2/+50Symphony of the Night speech?
      • zeromous, on 01/29/2008, -0/+15What is a man- but a miserable pile of secrets?
        • incabulos, on 01/29/2008, -2/+2Good man. SOTN ftw! Though I don't get the GGP's reference to SOTN.... unless... State of the Nation instead of State of the Union (SOTU).
      • Tochi, on 01/29/2008, -0/+10Mankind ill needs a saviour such as you!
      • hatdrop, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing
        • Trykt, on 01/29/2008, -0/+2What need for the shepherd when the wolves are all gone? My time on this world has come to an end.
          • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1Where's that from?
          • jnosanov, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1The end of the upside down castle, when you kill Dracula, I think.
        • rpatel11, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1i do believe the monsignor's finally got the point.
        • Hergerstone, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1We shall flow a river forth to thee... And teeming with souls will it ever be,
      • Atrophius, on 01/29/2008, -1/+0That was what I thought of when I saw "SOTN" too ...
      • solid12345, on 01/29/2008, -0/+2Still befriending mortals? I'll not ask you to return to our side, but I demand you cease your attack!
      • jnosanov, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1We'll not meet again.
    • slvrbullet87, on 01/29/2008, -1/+18Well Ted kenedy is safe, they showed him sleeping atleast three times
      • alittleroy101, on 01/29/2008, -0/+7Ahaha you gotta love that man.
        • slvrbullet87, on 01/29/2008, -5/+3Eh, I think the least he can do is stay awake for the state of the union, even if you dont like bush you should give him that much respect, if nothing else just respect for the office
        • lajaw, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1Like Barney Frank loves his Frank's?
      • nihilite, on 01/29/2008, -0/+19You know what, cut him some slack. You'd be sleepy too if you just drank a fifth of scotch.
        • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2I'd have to drink at least a fifth of scotch to sit through the pRestident lying to the country yet again, too.
      • jimmyt, on 01/29/2008, -2/+2Yeah.. cut him some slack.. it was a long drive back from Chappaquiddick..
    • theutopian, on 01/29/2008, -1/+14Yep and Obama sat on his hands through most of it.
    • Mohanned, on 01/29/2008, -0/+14Nancy Pelosi was clapping and Dick Cheney gave a few standing ovations. So based on that meter we can tell who's guilty and to what extent.
    • ethanpack, on 01/29/2008, -2/+8I understand your point and where you're coming from, but if I were a politician, I'd clap during any president's State of the Union address. Not because I agreed with his/her stance, but out of respect of the office, the country, and the citizens I represent.

      I'd want my legislative and public actions to represent my beliefs and goals for America while in office, not for whom I clap or do not clap.
      • bagboyrebel, on 01/29/2008, -2/+6the president != the country. Showing respect for the president is not the same thing for showing respect for the country and I don't believe our current president has done anything to earn our respect.
      • floatingpoints, on 01/29/2008, -4/+4Respect of the office?

        Haha, wtf?

        What kind of strange ideals do YOU have? Respect is earned. Not guaranteed or expected.
    • cbuddha42, on 01/29/2008, -2/+2Or maybe they're just polite?
    • OstrakonX, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2...of treason?
    • Shloppy, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1Perhaps the same could be said of all religions. But enough talk, have at you!
  • InfodivaMLIS, on 01/29/2008, -43/+23President Obama writes his own speeches.
    • vingtdeux, on 01/29/2008, -1/+14Actually, he works in conjunction with a 26 year old. That 26 year old is the man!

      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/fashion/20speech ...
    • colonelbuckshot, on 01/29/2008, -1/+28Obama "co-writes" his political speeches with his team, like every other mainstream politician does

      http://www.newsweek.com/id/84756/
      • 7Mystery, on 01/29/2008, -1/+3Only because he doesn’t have the time to be sitting around, writing speeches. If you read his books, you’ll know most of the materials from his speeches are from his books.
    • fraglessone, on 01/30/2008, -0/+0And he also reads them off of cue cards, I also noticed he had to cut away several times because he even screwed that up.
  • Qtip42, on 01/29/2008, -61/+28Ok, I'm going to provide a little bit of opinion here since the majority of obama supporters are just saying nothing critical of this and gushing. So digg me down for being critical but if you supporters don't ask questions, what's keeping this guy on his toes?. He says we need to take on Al-qaeda...Why? They are a small militia IF that (most associated with the group are just angry at our presence). Once we leave, they'll go back to the hole they came from and no longer exist (just as they didn't exist till we created them after 9/11). What about the end of our "strategic plans" for the region? It is not our oil yet we're determined to lay the groundwork for an easy path to it...Why no end to nation building? There is NO more fight with Al-qaeda once our troops are gone so why even try to pretend there's still someone to attack (in afghanistan? You mean they're hiding in the rubble ready to attack us with sticks?).....

    There you go. Digg me down all you want but at least I'm being critical of the candidate rather than blindly supporting everything he says like you guys are doing.

    • mooseontheloose, on 01/29/2008, -26/+9Ask why Obama voted for the war, why he supports the war on drugs, why he wants to ban on gay marriage, why he voted for the Patriot Act. Bamabots have no response for that, the only words they know are change and hope. Rhetoric.
      • drachasor, on 01/29/2008, -4/+22There's an easy response to that. What you said are a bunch of lies and distortions.
    • VeryBoredNow, on 01/29/2008, -3/+20Dugg down as requested.
    • gadgetuk, on 01/29/2008, -1/+4While I agree to some extent with the point you're making - you alienate people by generalising about their standpoint on digg, that's why you'll get dugg down. You are able to just present your argument in isolation without the pre-empative attack, that way you can respond to others' counterpoints as required.

      I also wondered about Obama's position on Afghanistan. The problem is that people like "bangor" have bought the lie and see it as the birthplace of all terrorists. Personally I think all the "coalition" forces should be out of there as quickly as they should be out of Iraq but, hopefully, Obama sees that you have to make one step at a time, he doesn't want to make himself unelectable after all. That's politics I guess - the truth can be hard to tell in it's entirity, sometimes you have to spoonfeed it to get past people's inbuilt resistance to changing their mind.
    • mizenerd, on 01/29/2008, -2/+3Al Qaeda has been around for many years prior to 9/11 you moron. Dugg down.
    • Jawmht, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1OBL is/was head of Al Qaeda, which did 9/11.
  • getinthepit, on 01/29/2008, -47/+6Barack, You have my faith and my vote - but did you really pre-record your response to Bush's SoTU? The rumor is you taped this before Bush took the podium, if that is true, then I have to admit it was done in poor taste...
    • rebotfc, on 01/29/2008, -0/+10Every speech is prewritten man, most of the news you read is pre-written in anticipation of certain events.
    • VeryBoredNow, on 01/29/2008, -2/+10Poor taste? Do you have 7 years, I'd like to explain something to you about poor taste.
    • theutopian, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3Poor taste? Most politicians see the state of the union before Bush speaks his out of mouth.
    • phunlee, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3The Democratic response was written before the speech was given, too. Some groups get an early copy, so they don't look like idiots stammering around and literally responding word for word.
    • babar77, on 01/29/2008, -0/+7Poor taste? It's a slap in the face to Bush if Obama can write the speech beforehand and have it make sense. They released it after the SoTU, so if there was something that didn't make sense in the speech, he could've just not released it, and edited it first. Bush is completely predictable. I could've written a comment on digg saying how dumb is SoTU address was, and had it make sense.
      Obama's not an idiot, he knows what's coming. I question the politicians that couldn't see this coming.
  • jmpeagle, on 01/29/2008, -27/+20could they get the camera any tighter in there
  • Tripw0l, on 01/29/2008, -16/+19Spot on. I'm glad that we can support some one with foresight and can see through the issues to a common ground solution. Then again, this isn't the first time that I've heard such a speech. I can only hope that there is a possibility for some one genuinely interested in bettering America to actually make it to the White House. From what I've seen, Obama is that person. I also hope that he's capable. God speed.
    • thehuntedpossum, on 01/29/2008, -6/+1Ron Paul anyone?
    • Rehnborg, on 01/29/2008, -5/+3God Speed, I thought libs were against religion and especially in the government.
      • chadillak, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2Maybe it's a metaphor. Like a videogame code: sv_godspeedmode 1
      • siszam, on 01/31/2008, -1/+1You don't have minimal reasoning skills. Liberals are the ones fighting for Christ like love for others. Liberals fight for peace, health care, the poor, children, etc. It's your type who puts profits above people. I've seen your comments and I've buried them and every one of your stories. Don't pretend to know what Christians support. You're clearly very unfamiliar with Gods word and the fruits of Christians.
  • pjs1840, on 01/29/2008, -15/+174WAAAAH EXTREME CLOSEUP WHOAAAA
    http://excloseup.ytmnd.com/
    • Qtip42, on 01/29/2008, -1/+12The best response thus far. The close up scared me.
    • diskit, on 01/29/2008, -4/+6Horribly out of sync, even after refreshing the page.
    • chrisaug18, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4Is it sad that I watched that for about three minutes?
  • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/29/2008, -31/+34Bush is a chimp. I don't trust anything he says nor anything he does.
    He is the American Nero.
  • pictureDIGGER, on 01/29/2008, -11/+148To Mr. Obama: Please promise to do something about out of freaking control inflation, spending, taxing, and borrowing money. The government is living in a dream world. For once in my lifetime I would like to see the national debt go down due to policy change. I am not convinced that you will do this, as I have not heard you address this very important issue. This is a major issue that needs to be taken with a strong, dramatic change in policy. What steps will you take to address this issue? You promise so many additional services, how are we going to afford them?
    • drgooch, on 01/29/2008, -11/+2LMAO! Yeah, Obama is reading Digg. LMAO!!!

      You = KooKoo KooKoo KooKoo
      • CourtesyFlush, on 01/29/2008, -1/+3Apparently, the concept of exchanging ideas on a public chat board escapes some people.

        They're usually the ones calling everyone else crazy for posting personal opinion.
    • UMDWei, on 01/29/2008, -6/+14If we stop the war... we will put an end to a big chunk of the current expenses. Maybe the rest will work itself out once the fear factor is gone.
      • GhostyBoy, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2He very specifically says "bring our COMBAT troops home". I listen to these specific turns of phrase and nitpick them, because they always mean something (hey at least he's going for honesty instead of doublespeak). Honestly, I like this guy, but I think he knows he doesn't have the power to bring all the troops home.
        • radix2, on 01/29/2008, -1/+0Maybe like Australia, who are now going to bring home 500 combat troops, leaving 1000 working on civilian projects (ie construction, training etc)
      • Aurarch, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1MAYBE PIGS WILL FLY!
    • Henley24, on 01/29/2008, -2/+9http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
    • whalt, on 01/29/2008, -4/+17If you were alive during the 90's then you did see the national debt go down.
      http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
      • Xenufield, on 01/29/2008, -4/+2As well as some interns and the integrity of the Presidency.
        • rotundo, on 01/29/2008, -2/+7Oh bloody hell: I would rather have the president get a blowjob every day from a different whore than have him literally destroy our economy and the nation as has happened in Bush's tenure. Like those folks in the midwest who keep voting for "values" politicians and then lose their jobs and watch everything around them go to hell. You, sir, are an idiot.
      • bluesnowmonkey, on 01/30/2008, -1/+3The national debt did not go down in the 90's.

        Reference: your own link.
      • BlackJackJester, on 01/30/2008, -0/+4Bluesnowmonkey is right, the graph says that Clinton slightly lessened deficit spending, meaning the debt got larger, but at a slower rate under his regime. What I want to see is a sharp curve on that to go straight to below zero within a month after the next president takes office. I believe the only man with crazy enough ideas to pull that off is RP, and while his chances of actually winning are dwindling, the more votes he gets, the more the next president has to listen to his ideas.
    • dwrecktion, on 01/29/2008, -1/+7http://www.barackobama.com/issues/fiscal/
    • Guspaz, on 01/29/2008, -8/+3Out of control inflation? What are you smoking?!?!?

      The US's curerrent inflation (2007-2008) is 2.8%. That's a pretty darned normal rate of inflation.

      By comparison, the current rate of inflation in Zimbabwe is estimated at 150,000%. THAT is out of control inflation.
      • SoundMoneyMan, on 01/29/2008, -1/+9Guspaz,

        Where did you get that inflation rate of 2.8%??? From the government? I'm sure they're being as forthcoming as possible. When was the last time you bought groceries or filled up your gas tank, or paid your utility bill? Food and energy are through the roof!! 2.8%???? You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows.

        Like the majority of this nation (and the world) you've bought the theory that inflation is somehow the natural order of things, something we should keep at a "moderately healthy" pace. Not true. This is Keynesian BS that is finally starting to stink. Are you suggesting we wait until we have 150,000% inflation before we do something?
        • mchinsky, on 01/30/2008, -1/+1Sure and the price of boob jobs went up too. When taken as a whole 2.8% is accurate. If you exclude fuel and expensive food (thanks to aholes pushing for ethonal that is using up our corn crops) inflation would be like 1.8%.

          If Obama or a liberal said the sky was purple, you would agree, but if Bush said it was blue, you'd call him a liar.

          In some ways I hope a lib wins next year so we can get 4 years of hell overwith and then another 12 years of the best party running things before they get too high on the hog.
        • rickyg67, on 01/30/2008, -0/+0That's about the most wise statement I have heard in this Obama loving link. Get the Dem in office, and we will get another conservative in office shortly there after. I think overall the candidates are pretty weak in general, so maybe we will have better luck next go 'round.
    • recruz, on 01/30/2008, -0/+2No offense to anybody's comment here, but solving the economy is not an easy task. Yes, cutting down on government spending can help, but it is not the only piece of the puzzle. Part of the problem is that our country as a whole is too reliant on other countries. We import and use more products than we export and produce. Basically, the entire country spends more money than it makes, not just the govt. Our country is an oil hog, and in addition we are exporting labor. The big companies are benefiting from the cheaper labor, but unless that money is recycled back into our economy, then it is not helping the country overall. It is a damn hard issue.
  • Proctor, on 01/29/2008, -92/+12Anti Christ Description:

    1.- He will come as a man of Peace (Obama promises peace in Iraq, defeat for the US)
    2.- He will come mounted on a white Female horse(Obama mother is white who had 6 African husbands)
    3.- He will come to deceive( Obama says he's a Christian but in fact he was born a Muslim, practices the Islamic religion, prays Friday’s facing Mecca)
    4.- He will make himself the most powerful man on earth, if elected
    5.- He will try to destroy the Jewish People and Israel( Obama has said he loves the Arabs specially the Palestinians, hates Israel and Jews. Admires Hitler, Osama etc)
    6.- He will present himself as good and righteous but in fact he's Satan himself. Violence is in his heart
    7.- Obama will help Al Qaida in its evil projects.
    8.- Barack Hussein Obama is the “King of the South” predicted in the Bible.(Daniel .11, Kenya is south of Jerusalem)
    9.- Obama comes to implant muslim Sharia Law upon America.
    • chromerium, on 01/29/2008, -4/+36lol, epoch fail!
    • Coven, on 01/29/2008, -3/+32Proctor, kindly remove your head from your ass before your next post, before somebody shoves their foot up there next to it.
      • CourtesyFlush, on 01/29/2008, -2/+4I'd like to see someone actually pull that off over the intarwebs.

        Threats of physical violence are entirely worthless on chat boards. And the surprising thing is....they usually come from peaceniks who claim to abhor torture.
        • Coven, on 01/29/2008, -2/+1I didn't threaten him with violence. I said somebody probably will.
    • VeryBoredNow, on 01/29/2008, -2/+15Yea, 2 billion people will just sit back and let obama impose radical islam on them... RIIGHHTTT. I am muslim by the way and I wouldn't let it happen.
    • orangefly, on 01/29/2008, -0/+13/moves finger up and down on lips while humming
    • pimpofpixels, on 01/29/2008, -2/+14Ah mythology.
      You could take all of those quotes and apply them to Bush.
      You rapture people are pretty sick.
    • mishaco, on 01/29/2008, -3/+5i believe that is called slander , sir !
      • Coven, on 01/29/2008, -1/+6It is written. I believe that is called libel, sir!
    • inajeep, on 01/29/2008, -2/+9Missing 10. Profit!!1

      Thanks for the laugh, you nutter.

    • nihilite, on 01/29/2008, -3/+3Beyond being painfully ignorant, you obviously understand nothing about how US government works.
    • jaej, on 01/29/2008, -2/+4lol
    • jdh358, on 01/29/2008, -2/+7You are truly a ***** idiot.
    • BoogieManOh, on 01/29/2008, -4/+4Oh, I see, and Bush is Jesus, I suppose?
    • shiftclick, on 01/29/2008, -3/+2I'm giving you a digg for creativity... that's some good sh_t. (Hope it doesn't come true...)
    • Laminarcissus, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3And Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy, and Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln...
    • Synova, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1Every intelligent historian in the world knows that The Apocalypse of John (Revelation) was referring to Nero Caesar and events that happened in the first century.

  • mahsah, on 01/29/2008, -14/+3in before paul/gravel/zombie dennis
    • mypenis, on 01/29/2008, -6/+2The only zombie is you. Give me some evidence that Obama is worth our time and maybe we wouldn't be so suspicious. Pretty speeches don't cut it.
      • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1Why would someone feel the need to, or even want to talk to, someone who calls themselves "mypenis".

        /blocked.
  • stackered, on 01/29/2008, -115/+312Obama > everyone else.... yes that includes Ron Paul
    I'm ready for the buries, bring it on.
    • mypenis, on 01/29/2008, -24/+28wow. how very mature of you. can you at least explain WHY he's > everyone else?
      • drachasor, on 01/29/2008, -13/+16Because he brings diverse people together. No other candidate is anywhere close to Obama's level in this regard. He also has a solid record of integrity and wisdom (such as on the Iraq war). He's also quite honest, which is pretty different from most of the other options out there.

        Oh, and unlike most of the candidates, including Ron Paul, Obama is electable (but that's just icing on the cake).
        • plondry, on 01/29/2008, -5/+13Actually being electable, considering the way US politics work, makes me question his honesty and integrity.
          • drachasor, on 01/29/2008, -6/+2Given his record and how he has had integrity throughout his campaign and before, I think there is little reason not to trust him. Look at the evidence.
          • Xenufield, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4You mean like how he won his State and federal seats from people who just happened to have scandals arise when he was running?
          • rezonq3, on 01/29/2008, -2/+6I am sorry, but this idea of being electable is the very reason why Paul isn't. If you believe a candidate isn't electable then he/she won't be elected. Self fulfilling prophecy. Anything is possible if you believe. Follow your heart and logic and vote for who you believe is the best candidate. If everyone did that, and the media didn't represent candidates based on who was 'electable' then I think everyone would redefine their terms on whether Ron Paul is that, electable. In my opinion, he is the most electable candidate running.

            Just my two cents.
        • OrangeTide, on 01/29/2008, -0/+6Just because he's electable does not mean he represents my ideals. I've voted for candidates who had no chance of winning for many years now. I see no reason to change my own beliefs in what is right for this nation so I can be on the winning side. (if you consider neo-socialism "winning").
        • Malevolant, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3All candidates bring diverse groups together so that is a completely moot point. Diverse just means people of different colors, faith, etc. and no candidate has cornered that market, and no one ever will, as diverse as our population is.

          He has a solid record of integrity and wisdom? So voting present, instead of yea or nay, equates to integrity now? If anything it demonstrates a lack of integrity by not voting your conscience, due to fear of political retribution. He also accused out soldiers of "air-raiding" villages and killing civilians, with no basis for said words. he's gone on record with the ways he'd handle geopolitical situations, and both sides of the political spectrum have handed him his ass.

          The most hilarious and ironic adjective you use in describing him is honest. Laughable. You fail to remember that he is a politician and no politician gains higher office without lying, over-stating, re-framing their past, and using the hype machine to it's fullest.

          You can spin Obama into the second coming and think he's the be all, end all, but you are simply buying into every part of the hype machine. He's no different than the other candidates and if you think he is you're a fool. I seriously cannot believe all of the people buying into the massive media campaign. It's ***** sad and this goes for all candidates. Take off the blinders, open your eyes, and wake up. He's a politician being sold to you as your savior. I am sick of hearing the word "change" because it's just a catch phrase meant to pander to the mass of sheep in America. I'm not being negative, I am being realistic. Nothing will change no matter who we elect and I'd bet the farm on that one because all I have to do is look at the past.

          We are a country, politically speaking, of peaks and valleys and no matter who is elected, the torch will be passed and business will continue as usual.
      • Pilot85, on 01/29/2008, -2/+26...A maturity lecture from "mypenis". I don't talk to my penis. anymore.
      • Marvelboy, on 01/29/2008, -3/+4He's already proven it mathematically, I fail to see what else you want.
      • Xenufield, on 01/29/2008, -3/+8Being a smooth talking Socialist doesn't make him a good candidate, it makes people see that millions of Americans are sheep that will follow anyone with a silver tongue, just like with Bill Clinton.
        • SpykerSpeed, on 01/29/2008, -0/+7Perfect description of Obama... "smooth talking socialist", I'll have to remember that one.
        • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 01/30/2008, -2/+1Liberals are obviously socialists.
    • davidkeithjones, on 01/29/2008, -28/+29Ron Paul is so over.
    • kutateli, on 01/29/2008, -22/+71Obama is the new Ron Paul on Digg.
      • OrangeTide, on 01/29/2008, -1/+27so easily are the masses swayed.
        • allan17, on 01/29/2008, -1/+11Were the masses ever really on Paul's side? Many people jumped on the Ron Paul bandwagon because they were desperate for change – and who can blame them? They didn’t support him because they agreed with all of his ideas - it's because he offered very different solutions than most other candidates. Just look at how they were willing to jump from Paul to Kucinich - who are at completely different ends of the board.
        • Xenufield, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3Only the politically inept were doing that. Anyone who actually has libertarian beliefs would see hell freeze over before they vote for Kucinich.
        • eean, on 01/30/2008, -0/+2That's allan17's point... most Ron Paul supporters weren't libertarian, they were just looking for something new.
      • diskit, on 01/29/2008, -7/+8Holy *****, no way, Obama's fans are in no way as annoying as the Ron Paul fans on Digg.
      • Malevolant, on 01/29/2008, -2/+12No doubt about it. It's amazing how so many of you fall inline behind a hype machine. They play you like the sheep you are yet you're oblivious to it. This is what sickens me about the political process. So many are so easily swayed by nothing, but pandering and speeches written to appeal to your emotional side, and not your intellect.
        Democrat or republican, I don;t care what you believe in, just stop falling for the ***** being sold to you.
      • X9001, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2I wish you hadn't said that
      • adadadada, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1amen!
    • identifiedlogo, on 01/29/2008, -9/+2Paul is the real deal, Obama is fresh version of Paul. Obama=Paul On major issues. So If paul doesn't make it, Obama is the definite choice.
    • mediaploy, on 01/29/2008, -5/+19Too bad Obama attends Bilderberg group meetings and in a member of the CFR.
      • lowerlogic, on 01/29/2008, -1/+4Have any sources? I've seen video of Hillary at a Bilderberg meeting but haven't seen/heard anything about Obama attending one of those.
      • PunkRampant, on 01/30/2008, -1/+1So what? Tell me how that will affect his presidential policies.
        • stealthc, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1That's like asking how loving the taste of mulched baby stew will affect his presidential policies. The Bilderberg and CFR people are power-mad and insane, yet they influence government policies all over the world. If a candidate has ANYTHING to do with them, watch out.
    • fokov, on 01/29/2008, -1/+7Both talk about change and helping with taxes (go figure, I've never heard a politician say that before lol). However, they don't have anything on the record that shows they will do whatever it takes to change the state. Obama seems to be all talk. If you have better links that can show what he is doing that makes him so great other than propaganda speeches, please msg me or post them.
    • janeuner, on 01/29/2008, -13/+3Obama's gov't > everyone else's gov't > Paul's gov't
      And there you see why Paul supporters support Paul.
      • emmeron, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say here.
        None.
    • tehbored, on 01/29/2008, -6/+2The times they are a changin.
    • GrubFisher, on 01/30/2008, -3/+0Sorry, you're not getting buried. The bury brigade supports Obama.
      • 10GunSalute, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1The Bury Brigade is a group of neo-cons and fundamentalists. Remember EditorRespose and amightywind?
    • 10GunSalute, on 01/30/2008, -0/+3When will we ever learn for our mistakes? When will we learn that the big, all-powerful government thing ISN'T WORKING? People like Obama will just make our national debt / inflation a million times worse. Yes, he may have some good social programs, which is great in the short term. But then when Obama's term is done, our economy will be hanging by a thread, and some crazy neo-con will move in and ***** up every thing Obama's done. We'll be back to where we started. People like Ron Paul are pushing for *permanent* change, where states and communities provide you with your services, taking a load off the federal economy, giving power back to the people, and stopping the government from becoming even more of a tyrannical superpower like it is now. I support Obama, but only because he's better than all the mindless neo-cons.
  • mentol, on 01/29/2008, -36/+22is it me or he's reading the text from a prompter ?
    • VeryBoredNow, on 01/29/2008, -6/+32Is it me or are you retarded? Of course he is.
    • chris9902, on 01/29/2008, -2/+21How does that change what he said?
    • drachasor, on 01/29/2008, -1/+18You'd prefer it if he was holding a copy of his speech on paper instead?
    • fraglessone, on 01/30/2008, -0/+0I noticed that too.. Of all the candidates, Ron Paul is the only one with REAL specific answers that REALLY address the problems and crisis we face. Lets face it, Ron Paul is brilliant, and the only reason more people aren't voting for him is because their attention span doesn't cover a long enough time to comprehend half of the REAL problems being discussed. THIS ISN'T ENTERTAINMENT, IT'S YOUR ***** FUTURE
  • VeryBoredNow, on 01/29/2008, -18/+7Powerfull clossing statement. Imagine a SOTU where everyone gets up and applauds.
    • Rehnborg, on 01/29/2008, -2/+6You must not have watched it because that happened multiple times.
      • VeryBoredNow, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1When he entered and when he left
  • skippy562, on 01/29/2008, -28/+11how come his lips looks like he was drinking a blue slurpy
    • misfit410, on 01/29/2008, -17/+5"how come his lips looks like he was drinking a blue slurpy"
      Easy, Ted Kennedy often gets drunk, while sitting on the toilet his fat ass dunlaps into the toilet a bit and gets stained
      blue from the 2000 flushes tablets inside the tank. We know where Obamas lips have been firmly planted do we not?
    • BlackJackJester, on 01/30/2008, -1/+2Because he's black. Black people love slurpee's
  • someguyouknow, on 01/29/2008, -28/+7Oops. Bury this comment please.

    Edit: I wish there was a delete button.
    • YanMan, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1Next time hit refresh or back on your browser before clicking "Submit Comment."
    • palmer, on 01/30/2008, -0/+2...there WERE a delete button.
  • misfit410, on 01/29/2008, -24/+12Sick of that type of Spin, Bush is a douche but - those tax cuts are for EVERYONE.
    Bush is talking about giving $600-$1200 back, how does that only benefit the upper class?
    to a middle class or less person $1200 is a LOT of money (it will pay most folks monthly bills)..
    to the upper class it's enough to wipe their butt with.
    • letierri, on 01/29/2008, -2/+11$600-$1200 does not apply to people with over $75k annual income
      • zeromous, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1indeed. To the "MIddle Class" which barely clears 75k before taxes 1200$ is an extra paycheck.
        Woah boy! I'm freakin laughing all the way to the bank.

        Oh wait, I make too much money? Why am I so scared ***** that all my savings are going to evaporate over the next 5-10 years?

        Sorry but if you're to buy my vote, I'd say its worth 5000$. Then we'll talk. That would help a lot, and I'd promise to spend part of it on a shiny new tv and sound-system.
        • CourtesyFlush, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1Gimme gimme gimme.

          It's nice of you to post the selling price of your vote. We can all see just how the American voting process works these days.

          Unfortunately, this is the typical voter - willing to sell out to the flim flam artist who promises the most hand outs.

          Unfortunately, they can't seem to remember being bought and sold out year after year.
          • zeromous, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1You should turn on your sarcasm detector. I am neither American, or available for purchase. I think you missed the part about thousands of dollars evaporating from the average middle class joes, savings...and this is BEFORE inflation. This "tax benefit" or "stimulus payment" whatever you want to call it is a joke, compared to the loss the middle class has had to absorb in the past year not even accounting for inflation.

            The point was is this is a shoddy attempt to buy a vote. Not even a good attempt. In fact its downright insulting as a tax cut. At least you got that part of it.
    • drcato, on 01/29/2008, -1/+5I am not an expert on this, but I think when he was talking about the tax cuts that benefit only the upper class, he was talking about the tax cuts enacted by Bush years ago that will expire in 2010. His complaint for the planned tax cuts this coming Spring/Summer is that senior citizens aren't included and it does nothing to increase unemployment insurance. Not saying either the old or new tax cuts are working/not working. Just trying to clarify that they are two different things that he was referring to.
    • hamhat, on 01/29/2008, -0/+3listen to what he said : he used averages, not stats for each income bracket...

      he is full of ***** as usual
    • drachasor, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2Did you not pay any attention over the last few years? Bush's tax cuts overwhelmingly benefited the richest people in America. Yes, there was a small benefit for the middle class, but nothing like what the rich got. Notice how Bush loves to talk about the AVERAGE benefit of his plans, that's because when you give the rich a huge benefit, it brings up the AVERAGE, even if most people don't get a benefit anywhere close to that. Tell me when the median starts looking impressive on any plan of Bush's.
    • phytolacca, on 01/29/2008, -3/+10Yes 600 to 1200 is a lot of money. And if you are in the middle class that is what you'll get, however if you are say in the top 10% you save 30,000$ a year under the Bush tax plan. 30 ***** thousand! You better believe that the 30Gs doesnt go to pay their bills or buy grocieries or in any way support a local economy...no you can bet every penny is invested back into faceless mutual funds that might invest in companies that use sweatshop labor or they might invest in a company that increases profits by taking jobs overseas. The point is that the rich are culpable in bringing the quality of life down for the vast majority of people on Earth, and hide behind the free market while doing it. In fact the poor exist for one reason only to keep the rich, rich. So you can take that 600-1200 bucks and whistle while the guy making 7 figures ***** you and yours for generations to come.
      • cryptomystic, on 01/29/2008, -3/+2I wish I could digg you up twice.
      • YanMan, on 01/29/2008, -3/+2Let's say the $30k is your salary. How 'bout we have your employer pay the $30k in taxes instead. I'm sure the government can put the money to better use than you can.
        • phytolacca, on 01/29/2008, -2/+2comment makes no sense, pull head out of ass before typing
          • YanMan, on 01/29/2008, -0/+2Perhaps you should read it again. Just trying to show you how a $30k tax cut for a small business owner could "support a local economy," or more specifically, support you if you are said small business owner's employee.
          • bagelmaster, on 01/29/2008, -2/+1WTF are you on about YanMan? Are you suggesting that someone not be paid $30k for working all year and that money instead be put towards a community? I really don't know what you're getting at.
          • YanMan, on 01/29/2008, -0/+2@bagelmaster: I guess the sarcasm in my original comment wasn't apparent enough. I was simply demonstrating one way that a tax cut can make its way back into "a local economy" by suggesting, sarcastically, that phytolacca would rather be laid off so that his employer could pay more in taxes
    • phunlee, on 01/29/2008, -1/+3The $600 bucks isn't a tax cut. It's an economic stimulus plan meant to put money back into the economy. But what they haven't fixed, and most likely can't fix, is the fact that our money is becoming more and more worth LESS every day. Because of out of control spending around the world (specifically around Iraq) The tax cuts Obama's talking about are the ones Bush put in place early on. Those are the ones that gave the richest among us a HUGE tax cut. So he cut taxes, and then expanded spending on a war he chose to get in to.What would happen if your job cut your pay in half, but instead of saving and being thrifty, you went out for steak dinners, bought a new flatscreen, refurnished your house, bought a new house, destroyed it, and bought another one, then bought your neighbors house, etc, etc? You'd be screwed. and even $600 bucks won't help you then. That's what we're up facing.

      So get educated. Learn the differences in economic rhetoric. Learn how money hurts and helps. Learn about inflation. Wiki all this. That's a good start.
    • YanMan, on 01/29/2008, -1/+3Why are you getting dugg down? The stimulus package is bipartisan - lots of compromises were made.

      Here are the details...
      $600 for each individual earning $75k or less
      $1200 for each married couple earning $150k or less
      +$300 for each child

      Those earning at least $3k a year also qualify for a $300 "rebate" even though they pay no federal income tax.
      • stealthc, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1Holy crap. If that's true, they're sending me $900. Gonna buy me some GOLD.
  • flink405, on 01/29/2008, -45/+7After next Tuesday Hillary will prove to everyone that she is the Democratic candidate for President. Obama is a nice suit with a radio voice, but there is nothing there but fluff, platitudes and generalities wrapped up in a facade of we need a change.
    (What politician running for office has not offered themself as a change from the status quo?)

    • 1337Einstein, on 01/29/2008, -0/+25Hillary is a stunning example of dirty, corrupt policies and practices, as has been demonstrated throughout this race, the kindest thing I can say of her is she's a more promising candidate than Guiliani.
      • babar77, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4I'm at the point that I put her down with Guiliani. I just hear "experience, experience, experience" come out of her mouth like Rudy say's 9/11. What experience Hillary? Obama has held public office longer than her and proved himself more willing to tackle tough and controversial issues than she was. She's spent the last 6 years in the Senate laying low, hoping to win the presidency on name recognition alone. Which then begs the question, "Is is really experience when you're not really doing anything?"
        • bagelmaster, on 01/29/2008, -0/+2Dugg up for the name recognition thing. I can GUARANTEE that if she didn't have the same last name as Bill, she would've dropped out of the race months ago.
    • digitalarcanum, on 01/29/2008, -1/+10I still think Hillary is a nazi in disguise. It's written all over her. The fact that the only emotion she can show in public is anger really scares me.
      • lamprey187, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2agreed, and the fake tears she whipped up in New Hampshire to get a few votes was pathetic to me....scary some people fell for it.
      • drachasor, on 01/29/2008, -1/+3I wouldn't demonize Hillary. It's rather uncalled for. She is, however, stuck on divisive and destorting political methods. I don't doubt that she wants good things for the country, but she just isn't going to change politics the way it needs to be changed.
    • mnpilot, on 01/29/2008, -0/+6Hillary is a hole....nothing more, nothing less. She has played dirty pool and people are sick of the same ***** from Bush and Bill Clinton. No more *****!!
    • drachasor, on 01/29/2008, -0/+6Way to ignore Obama when he talks about the kind of change we need. Frankly, you don't hear politicians talking about bringing people together much, or eliminating lobbyists, or telling YOU that you can help make the nation great. Obama understands how the divisiveness of politics today destroys public credibility and damages our great Nation. No other candidate really seems to recognize this disease in our political system, and dismissing that as "meaningless" is uncalled for.
    • lamprey187, on 01/29/2008, -0/+5Hillary is a corrupt politician in a creepy pantsuit, but that is not why I dislike her. She is a flip-flopper about the war, uses her hubbie as a mouthpiece, and the only messages she has in her campaign are lies and mudslinging. Not to mention she fires up the Republican base against her while dividing her own party.......a bad choice for a general election.
    • emmeron, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1I don't like Obama as a president: I'm anti- lots of government and socializing everything under the sun...
      but hey, I'd take 3 of him over Hillary.
  • trendy59, on 01/29/2008, -24/+10if you were against the war, why did you re-authorize it? attacking Pakistan will make the world safer? a politics of hope and common sense? - where is the substantive policy? what is the common purpose without making government bigger? I've heard NOTHING substantive it this address, and he spoke for about 7 minutes.
    • chrispr, on 01/29/2008, -4/+5-2 diggs, and no reply. I'm interested to see where trendy59 is wrong.
      • mtjohnson, on 01/29/2008, -0/+6Obama didn't vote for the war, first of all. He was not in the Senate at the time, but he was against it from the beginning.

        He doesn't advocate attacking Pakistan, but he does advocate attacking al qaeda on the western border if we have actionable intelligence.

        The rest of the comment doesn't deserve rebuttal.
    • phunlee, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1please see the common response to this. circa 2006-7.
    • YanMan, on 01/29/2008, -2/+2No *****. And Obama had the balls to blame Bush for earmarks. Give me a break - the president has his faults, but he isn't responsible for every political problem in this country.
      • emmeron, on 01/29/2008, -0/+2I hate to agree with you on this, but right on man. Right on. (Hate to agree cuz it's fun to just blame Bush)
    • phunlee, on 01/29/2008, -1/+5damnit. I can't believe I have to respond. Re-authorizing the war: If congress didn't write a bill the POS Prez would sign, that would leave soldiers without funding. We like our soldiers, we don't like what their current mission is. So, even if I don't like who or why they're shooting, or why they're there, I do want them to have ammo/food/armor/a decent salary etc. That's what "re-authorizing the war" ACTUALLLY ***** MEANS at this point. Would you vote to cut their funding? The President uses his power to threaten soldiers' lives. The dems had no choice but to send him what he wanted. 50% ain't enough to fight a sitting President. Attacking terrorists in Pakistan if the Musharaff won't do it? I think that's common sense.
    • babar77, on 01/29/2008, -2/+3Obama didn't reauthorize the war, he authorized the funding. Cutting the funding was not going to end the war. Congress does not have enough votes to overcome a veto to bring the troops home.
      He never said he would attack Pakistan, he would only go in to get Bin Laden only after Pakistan showed they were unwilling or unable to do so.

      Maybe if you two would actually listen from time to time, and started actually doing your own research, you wouldn't wonder why people are just digging you down.
  • ElAssoWipo, on 01/29/2008, -26/+13This is what I heard:

    "Let's pretend nothing happened."

    There won't be any change. Same criminals, same system, same people, different PR guy. No accountability.

    • petrodollar, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1link?
      • ElAssoWipo, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1You want me to give you a link to the video you just watched?

        Obama said nothing in this video. The only thing he actually said is that he wants to give tax cuts to the middle class just after saying that the last thing America needs is to lower its taxes revenue. And that he wants to pull out of Iraq, like the rest of them except for Giuliani and McCain. Only problem is, the president doesn't have that power.
    • ventralnet, on 01/29/2008, -0/+2Yup... you're damned if you do and your damned if you don't
  • jschluchter, on 01/29/2008, -25/+84 MORE YEARS!
  • kronzdigg, on 01/29/2008, -43/+9Socialist! RP 2008
  • sonnygill, on 04/07/2008, -23/+26Well said, Obama 08!
  • physco827, on 01/29/2008, -22/+48Obama said "Middle Class Tax Cut", sounds good to me. :) Not only did he rebut all of the garbage that came out of the Presidents mouth, he recognized the fallen soldiers of that day. Probably one of the least selfish people on the planet right here ladies and gentlemen, all he cares about is the American People. If he doesn't win this country will go to *****. Have a nice day.
    • SAc0balt, on 01/29/2008, -11/+2What middle class?
      • petrodollar, on 01/29/2008, -1/+4Roughly, mid and lower top tier wage earners who receive a W2.
    • DEIx15x8, on 01/29/2008, -6/+6And saying what ever you want to hear if it gets a vote.
    • blacktriangle, on 01/29/2008, -4/+4"Middle Class Tax Cut" is meaningless if there isnt a middle class still in existence.
      • RustyJ, on 01/29/2008, -3/+1In soviet russia, Tax Cuts you!
      • physco827, on 01/29/2008, -2/+3How would the middle class leave existence in a year?
        • bjornski, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4Expanded "free trade" agreements. ARM mortgages re-setting and foreclosing people from their homes. Costs going up and up and up, and wages stagnating or falling because it's cheaper to hire Jose or Huilang to do your work because it helps the "bottom line" of your company.
        • janeuner, on 01/29/2008, -2/+3It's taken a lot longer than a year =/
    • fokov, on 01/29/2008, -3/+5"Middle Class Tax Cuts" how is that possible when you want to have socialized medicine. Who does he think is going to pay for it? The rich? lmao
      • r00fus, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1Who's going to pay? How about why we pay so goddamn much?
        He has an answer for that, may not be the best one... but at least he's answering the right question.
    • Malevolant, on 01/29/2008, -3/+6Wow, what a horrible post. So you say he can buy your vote with a tax cut, huh? Geezus.
      Obama recognized fallen soldiers huh? What about when he said the soldiers were air-raiding villages and killing civilians? That's great support there...
      Please tell us, with facts and figures, how he is one of the least selfish people on the planet. that is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. How can you even prove such an ignorant comment? if he doesn't win the country will go to *****? Seriously, what are you smoking?
    • lgfaphile, on 01/29/2008, -2/+6"all he cares about is the American people". You're kidding right? The man is a politician, not the prophet come to save us all. Get a grip on reality.
  • marioday, on 01/29/2008, -17/+33George Bush convinces me more than ever that we need someone like Barack Obama to lead the country.Let hope and unity prevail.
    • lgfaphile, on 01/29/2008, -1/+4Why exactly?
      • DephexTwin, on 01/29/2008, -2/+1Because hope and unity are good things!
    • Neo31rex31, on 01/30/2008, -0/+0Yes, why? the guy is a muslim and well....osama is just too close to him
  • atlandrew, on 01/29/2008, -36/+4His middle name is 'Hussein'...right?? The guy hasn't even been senator for a full term and he knows 'everything' about how to fix this country....I sure do feel comfortable giving him the keys so he can drive the bus...
    • MadKennyP, on 01/29/2008, -0/+15Can you explain how his middle name affects his ability to govern?
      • NJank, on 01/29/2008, -1/+7he's trying to make it look as bad as if he had the middle name hitler, or maybe barack 'imgonnapnwnthiscountry' obama...

        silliness
    • Rehnborg, on 01/29/2008, -11/+2I agree with you that he is underqualified and I don't feel comfortable giving him the keys.
      I disagree that time spent in senate is a strong indicator of how he well he is prepared for president. Most Governors are more qualified because they actually have to run a country and not sit around in meetings, work 80 days a year, and get paid vacations the rest of the time.
    • theutopian, on 01/29/2008, -1/+19Lincoln had only been a representative for two years before becoming President. Let's list Obama's experience, okay? Currently US Senator. Was previously a State Senator in the Illinois house, was for many years. Was a prominent community activist. Was a professor of Constitutional Law and the University of Chicago. Was a respected lawyer. Went to Harvard. Was editor of the Harvard Law Review. What did Bush do? Ran several companies into the ground, owned a baseball team and was a mediocre governor. The choice is not hard for me. Obama has plenty of experience. More than our current President ever had.
      • bagelmaster, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2I dugg you up, but comparing his achievements to Bush isn't fair because Bush won't be in the next election. Maybe comparing him to Hillary or McCain would've been better?
        • theutopian, on 01/29/2008, -0/+4You're probably right. But I'm also trying to point out the fallacy of choosing someone based solely on their experience. Experience is relative.
    • e73rock, on 01/29/2008, -0/+0Can't believe this crap...sounds like the assclam at the bar the other night..."as long as no Ni@#!# gets in office!" which sounds a bout as smart as "i can't vote for him, his last name starts with an O"!! Truly truly ignorant.
    • surfrdawg, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1correct spelling is Husayn
  • donelson, on 01/29/2008, -27/+69IMPEACH CHENEY and his stooge, BUSH. Convict them and Send them to prison!


    Go Obama 2008 !
    • janeuner, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2Shouldn't that be Go Kucinich? Err wait, he dropped out. Gravel maybe?
      If you want to know why politics doesn't make sense, examine how people choose their votes. Frankly, it is amazing that politics works as well as it does.
  • amirman, on 01/29/2008, -17/+8did anybody else notice that after the SOTU when bushboy wasshaking people's hands, obama reached out to shake his hand, bushboy hesitated and decided to turn away and snub him.
    • Rehnborg, on 01/29/2008, -1/+9Not true, he shook his hand but didn't shake hiliary's hand.
      • zydeco, on 01/29/2008, -3/+1And that, sadly, will get more press than anything in the week ahead. I say he was right to snub Hillary for all the crap she's tried to pull during the primaries.
    • drgooch, on 01/29/2008, -1/+2LIAR!
    • pitlord, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1Total LIE! I saw it too and Bush DID shake Obama's hand!
      X^P
      Typical, liberal, anti judeo-christian, Obama loving, douche bag lie.
      >
      • amirman, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1i don't particularly love obama
        i wasn't stating it as truth but merely asking if i was the only person to see it
        i'm not typical
  • drgooch, on 01/29/2008, -9/+30He wants to pull combat brigades out, then says we need to listen to our military commanders. Which is it?
    • slearwig, on 01/29/2008, -3/+4It's uhhh.....let's uhh...go get Bin Laden instead.
    • lamprey187, on 01/29/2008, -2/+14Military Commanders end up sitting at a desk or out of a job when there is no war to fight. Lots of Generals advised JFK to start WW3 in Cuba. Was he wrong in not starting the war?
    • babar77, on 01/29/2008, -1/+12Well, he'll probably want to rehire all the military commanders that told Bush the Iraq war was not well planned and then Bush fired. You know, the ones that predicted extremely accurately what would happen. Remember