digg

Join DiggAbout

Barack Obama's Speech on Father's Day watch!

youtube.com — Barack addressed the congregation at the Apostolic Church of God in Chicago, IL on June 15, 2008.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • barackoblogger, on 06/15/2008, -58/+100He's a great leader
    • borez, on 06/16/2008, -14/+36We'll see
      • PeckerSlap, on 06/16/2008, -13/+22I wouldn't be so sure
      • CoMpUtErITGuY, on 06/16/2008, -3/+5Maybe he'll win after McCain's term is over.
    • credential101, on 06/16/2008, -25/+20A great leader with minimal leadership experience.
      • Flytrap, on 06/16/2008, -12/+19That is such an ignorant statement.

        We see great leadership qualities in teenagers and athletes like Jordan, etc. who inspire their teams to great memorable victories. We see leadership qualities in the young men of our armed forces who when a critical situation arises make the right decisions with minimal information and lead their men and colleagues out of danger or to victory.

        Great leadership is not about experience - we have George Bush to prove that. Leadership is about inspiring others to act in a that they might not have were it not for the direction being laid out or the inspirational call to arms being made. Admittedly one becomes a better leader the longer one has spends time in a position of leadership. That should bode well for Obama. Having already shown such great qualities, he can only get better... but then again, Bush has shown that that is not always guaranteed to be so.
        • vanimal, on 06/16/2008, -7/+1"Leadership is about inspiring others to act in a that they might not have were it not for the direction being laid out or the inspirational call to arms being made."

          Based on your definition of leadership, Bush is actually a fantastic leader. He inspired Congress to authorize military action in Iraq, something they probably wouldn't have otherwise done. He has inspired them to continue signing checks to pay for the war with money our country doesn't have even though it's incredibly unpopular.
      • Flytrap, on 06/16/2008, -15/+5That is such an ignorant statement.

        We see great leadership qualities in teenagers and athletes like Jordan, etc. who inspire their teams to great memorable victories. We see leadership qualities in the young men of our armed forces who when a critical situation arises make the right decisions with minimal information and lead their men and colleagues out of danger or to victory.

        Great leadership is not about experience - we have George Bush to prove that. Leadership is about inspiring others to act in a that they might not have were it not for the direction being laid out or the inspirational call to arms being made. Admittedly one becomes a better leader the longer one has spends time in a position of leadership. That should bode well for Obama. Having already shown such great qualities, he can only get better... but then again, Bush has shown that that is not always guaranteed to be so.
      • MrViklund, on 06/16/2008, -5/+11Shhh. Don't say anything negative about Obama, it's not allowed. The Obama fan boys will bury you and declare you an idiot for not voting on what they like.
        • PopcornDave, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2Then ***** 'em. Personally I'm leaning towards Obama at this point because I'm sick and tired of the same old dinosaurs in Washington. Some fresh blood would be a change. But I really don't give a flying ***** if what I say about a politician angers somebody or not. It's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it whether anybody agrees or not.
      • akamurph, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2All you Obama fanboys, know how many days he has actually been in the Senate, like actually BEEN there? 141. What a great leader with a great amount of experience huh?
    • DrNemo, on 06/16/2008, -11/+14Do you need to be leaded in your life?
      • jw5801, on 06/16/2008, -5/+15You need to be leaded in your understanding of grammar.

        ... ah! Nazis!
      • wphj, on 06/16/2008, -3/+2I would argue that yes, the country does in fact need a leader.
        • Brownds, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1No what the U.S. needs is an educated public to call shenanigans on our government
      • puncturevine, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0Take a look at where America has gone being led by the moronic monster in charge right now. You may think you don't need it, but the nation does. The nation needs it sorely.
    • buggles, on 06/16/2008, -13/+21spoken like a true follower....
    • vanguardanon, on 06/16/2008, -8/+12I have a few interests, 4x4 trucks, guns, and woodworking, which tend to have a huge anti-Obama population. It pains me to listen to rednecks that won't vote for him because he's black or because he has a muslim name. I wish I could expose them to who this man actually is. I wish I could get them to listen to a speech like this where Obama shares their criticism of black fathers and places the blame squarely where it belongs.

      Obama has my vote and I'm pretty sure he's going to win the general election. I hope he proves me right and becomes one of the great leaders in our history.
      • misfit410, on 06/16/2008, -10/+8Maybe they won't vote for him because he is a socialist piece of crap, who spits out one word repeatedly and idiots follow him, for no reason other than, he is black.
        • puncturevine, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0I follow him because he's proven himself worthy, in word and action. And a socialist would be supporting more of a highly government controlled welfare state. Notice that Obama is is asking American men to push hard to succeed in schools, their jobs, and even become business owners. He talking good old fashioned, hard working capitolism, but with finacial help, and financial motivation, to help more Americans be able to run successful businesses.
      • credential101, on 06/16/2008, -2/+6I agree...Many people do follow him because he's black....Tell me why 92% of the black population in the Pennsylvania primary voted for him? NINETY-TWO PERCENT of ONE RACE voted for him...to me, it seems a bit suspicious.
        • byronm, on 06/16/2008, -5/+4Why should we have to explain the obvious.. first time EVER in American History a black man is on his way to being elected and you wonder why black people would vote for that?

          Please read the placard that says "Pull head out of ass" before commenting in the future.
        • lordtyros, on 06/16/2008, -0/+4Because this is the first time a Black person has had a serious chance to lead this nation. It sets an incredible precedent that will hopefully be reflected in business and politics in the future. Black people are eager to support the success of someone who represents the fulfillment of their hopes for the past.. um... 400 years?
        • PopcornDave, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1@lordtyros

          400 years? This country has only been around 230+ years. Where's the 400 coming from? Did the pilgrims bring slaves over with them?
        • lordtyros, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2@PopcornDave

          "The first record of African slavery in Colonial America occurred in 1619." So pretty much, yeah.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_slavery
        • btschul, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1@byronm: It should not matter that he is black. The fact that people are voting for him because he is black is BAD. Presidents should be voted for because of their stance on the important issues, not the color of their skin.
      • mmmmmbiscuits, on 06/16/2008, -6/+5"It pains me to listen to rednecks that won't vote for him because he's black or because he has a muslim name."

        Spare us your pseudo-enlightened progressive *****. I'm not voting for him because he's an incompetent leftist with a shady Chicago political background and who, based on the crowd he's run with for the past 20+ years, possesses highly questionable judgment. If anyone is being "racist" it's the disproportionately huge % of the black population that has voted for Barry in various primaries despite his lack of qualifications and SOLELY due to his (partial) race.
        • puncturevine, on 06/16/2008, -1/+0I'm white, and I think Obama is gifted leader. What is the percentage of whites in certain southern states that will NEVER think of voting for a black president, simply because he's black ? Unfortunatley high % I would think.
    • rex84, on 06/16/2008, -5/+7Obey the leader.
    • MrViklund, on 06/16/2008, -2/+6What the F are you babbeling about?
    • LukasSmith, on 06/16/2008, -11/+5He is a great tard. Hey everyone guess who's father really sucked balls? Obama's. I think the last person who wants to celebrate a drunk polygamist with no legs that ditched his mother in Hawaii not because he couldn't afford it but because he was already married to another women is Obama. May I present the real slim shady, Obama's daddy.
      http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=5 ...
      Clearly Obama will do anything to win. Change you can believe in? not.
      • SammyJr, on 06/16/2008, -3/+2And H.W.'s father got busted for working with the Nazis....
      • wphj, on 06/16/2008, -2/+1Good thing his dad's not running then!
      • puncturevine, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1I think a large part of his speech had to do with the fact that he was going to break the mold of what his father di...ie: that he was not going to be anything like his father. Bush on the other hand is still finishing his daddy's business.
      • LukasSmith, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1The large part of his speech is that nobody knows what a real scumbag his father was because he has never been honest about it even in a book that is supposed to be factual like a biography. The question is his books are fairy tales so how how much of a fairy tale is Obama?
    • orlyfactor, on 06/16/2008, -6/+10Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na LEADER!
    • humbled, on 06/16/2008, -7/+2He's a great orator.

      There, fixed that for you.

      (I'm voting for Obama, too, but your claim remains to be seen.)
    • jzuska, on 06/16/2008, -6/+10Really? Great? What's he leading exactly?
      Most Liberal Man in senate?
    • hmunkey, on 06/16/2008, -7/+2Start at 9:30 and listen to 11:00.
      That part sent shivers down my spine. Amazing.
      • mmmmmbiscuits, on 06/16/2008, -2/+4Did you get a tingle up your leg too? Be careful because many male supporters have been known to get spontaneous Oboners as well.
      • Brownds, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1@hmunkey
        lol Get a life. I am voting for him but it's going to take A LOT more than words to fix our issues. When he makes it into office he'll have a lot to live up to. Don't get brain washed by a government figure that is the problem with at least 32% of Americans...
    • joe122370, on 06/16/2008, -2/+8since he's lead nothing.......
    • 4lton, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1This must have been a tough realization for barackoblogger to come to. Restate your opinions somewhere else troll.
    • jonnyboy1544, on 06/16/2008, -2/+4He gives a great speech... but so did Hitler and Mussolini.
      • puncturevine, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1Oh for the love of god...hitler's speeches were about the right of aryan men to pilage and conquer. Obama's are about men being reponsible for the care and upbringing of their children. Great orator or not, the treasure of what Obama says is in the content, not the style of delivery.
    • Andysan, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2If you are thinking of Obama as a great leader, maybe you should think of yourself as one of Lenin's "Useful Fools." Just saying.
    • Eezyville, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1Oh yeah like this speach sill really fix those 18 fatherless years I've had.
    • seomike, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1I love how he is so media bullet proof. Bill Cosby gave this speech years ago and was almost kicked out of his race for doing so...
  • cg4et, on 06/15/2008, -27/+166For the first time, I am starting to be optimistic that we can pull together as a country and fix the broken culture that we find ourselves in today.
    • mark076h, on 06/16/2008, -53/+10your a ***** idiot
      • cg4et, on 06/16/2008, -4/+36brilliant retort. you totally changed my mind.
      • Strman, on 06/16/2008, -3/+29Oh the irony.
      • Ajajadude, on 06/16/2008, -2/+17...and now that we've heard the brilliant rebuttal from the other side of the issue, I'd say you're the idiot.
      • christophe971, on 06/16/2008, -0/+13"*your* a ***** idiot" ...
        ...
        ... please be a troll
      • orion846, on 06/16/2008, -1/+3GET A BRAIN MORANS!
    • artwork, on 06/16/2008, -17/+4Thats what she said.
    • credential101, on 06/16/2008, -18/+4I feel this way after I watch movies...and movies are made in Hollywood....and Hollywood is fake.
      • Risingashes, on 06/16/2008, -0/+18You feel hopeful for the future after watching movies based on fiction?

        Are you sure you're qualified to be making analogies?
    • retral, on 06/16/2008, -17/+3Annihilating the second amendment isn't going to fix anything. Sadly, this will probably be one of the first things he does.
      • puncturevine, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0Pardon ? Where the hell did you get that idea from ?
        • retral, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2He's severely anti-gun. He's stated on multiple occasions that he'd outlaw concealed carry and he'll almost definitely put another (more strict in this case) AWB in place.

          But yeah, continue to bury me.. even though I speak the truth. This is one reason I don't exactly *want* to vote for obama.
        • retral, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2"This is one reason I don't exactly *want* to vote for obama."

          - Also, with that said.. I don't want to vote for mccain either. It'll definitely be a case of lesser evils, again.
    • dexter411, on 06/16/2008, -12/+1Okay, Trotsky.
    • Kikinou, on 06/16/2008, -12/+6Now the same African-American community that demonized Bill Cosby for saying is going to turn on him. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, the kings of race baiting, masters of the victim industry, meet your new enemy. A new cash cow has emerged. Ye shall now be known as "Uncle Tom"

      Sad.
      • relentless1914, on 06/16/2008, -0/+3Newsflash,

        While there was some demonization of Bill Cosby from the Black Community, the response has been overwhelmingly positive from the mojority, which is why the Cos has been touring the country speaking on these issues. Who do you think is inviting him if not the Black Community?

        http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&q=bill.cosb ...
    • LukasSmith, on 06/16/2008, -10/+3Will the real Obama's daddy please stand up:
      http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=5 ...
    • lgm1213, on 06/16/2008, -8/+2This speech reminded me of Bill Cosby and we all know people hate listening to Mr. Cosby now a days.
    • kingjam, on 06/16/2008, -5/+1Keep on dreaming...
    • craiger316, on 06/16/2008, -2/+2@cg4et you guys are the greatest country in the world, but unfortunately it's been overshadowed by the fact you have to be the world's police. I think it's time to step back and let the UN take this roll. Iran is next, but I think under the Democrats this will be done as a UN effort using the jumping off point established by the US in Iraq. The unfortunate thing is your leaders established this jumping off point at the cost of your economy and many lives. Such is "war" I suppose.
    • jonnyboy1544, on 06/16/2008, -4/+2Broken culture? Have you been to any other part of the world? (See China, Russa, the Middle East and Africa)

      This liberal guilty conscience thing goes a bit too far.
    • lesty420, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1Most of the world is waiting for 9/11 part 2. I've got my marshmallows ready.
  • IdigObama, on 06/15/2008, -40/+121A great man and I honestly believe he will be one of our greatest leader's.

    Obama 08 & 12!

    I'm ready for the CHANGE!
    • iizh, on 06/16/2008, -16/+50Already calling for Obama 2012 is a sign of utter stupidity and cult-like devotion. Wait for the first term to get at least part way through before judging if he can go on for another.
    • credential101, on 06/16/2008, -21/+21What change? Ready for more taxes taken out of your paycheck to be used for people that don't make any attempt to better themselves?
      • Exbzurq, on 06/16/2008, -10/+6You know what? Yes I do.
      • dexter411, on 06/16/2008, -11/+7Thank you! I love these "Change!" zealots who, when pressed, really only want to change the war in Iraq. That's convenient and all, since what we do in Iraq is the ONLY thing that the President alone can change... but not the societal revolution Marxists like Obama strive for.
        • consoneo, on 06/16/2008, -4/+14There's a lot more that needs changing in this, the Greatest Nation on Earth. We have lost morals, ethics, and voracity for the right in all things. The rights written and protected for us so long ago by our fore fathers; they've been obliterated and forgotten, or blatantly removed. I've started to fear our Government.. not in the traditional sense of fear, but the fear that it shall collapse itself with the lack of reinforcement of proper ideals, rights, morals, ethics, checks, and balances. I fear that the US Government will remove the love I have for this Nation, by making it a place unfit to live.

          I want it changed. I want it fixed. I want our path redirected, by necessity, in a similar fashion to the way it was on September 17, 1787. Because administration after administration has tore, and bit, and pecked parts of that great "Arrow" that pointed us in the right direction rendering it almost unreadable, and, recently, it has been spun to point wherever chance says it shall.

          We've been leading ourselves down a path with a "Point of No Return" sign on it. I don't know if Barack Obama can accomplish a turn around, facing us back the way we came, to get on to that path we strayed from, but I hope he can, because I know John McCain cannot.

          Does that satisfy your "What Change?" question? That's the way I see things. I want to change the Foreign Policy of our Nation as well, but it is not the only issue of import on the table.
        • kingjam, on 06/16/2008, -5/+2Consoneo, you are so dumb and ignorant it makes me LOL. God save us
        • byronm, on 06/16/2008, -1/+3The word "change" is symbolism for about huge document "Changes" to the government. I'm sorry, but its not Obama's fault you're an ignorant ***** who can't read a PDF that describes the "change" that you're oblivious to.



        • dexter411, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2"The rights written and protected for us so long ago by our fore fathers; they've been obliterated and forgotten, or blatantly removed. I've started to fear our Government.. not in the traditional sense of fear, but the fear that it shall collapse itself with the lack of reinforcement of proper ideals, rights, morals, ethics, checks, and balances."

          Barack Obama supports putting activist judges on the Supreme Court. He supports big government programs. He supports disproportionate taxation of people who are successful.

          Those are all things that the founding fathers did NOT want our republic to become, so you're a brainwashed dunce.
        • dellegazze, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0I wish Obama was a marxist...
      • morninglorii, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1For your argument to be valid, the "poor == not hard working" idiom must be true for the majority, not just the few you like to talk about. Show me some stats, and then we'll talk.
      • wonderworm, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Looks like you have been listening to McCain's lies again. The Fact is that 9 out of 10 Americans will PAY LESS TAXES under Obama than McCain.
        And that doesn't even consider the fact the Obama will balance our budget while McCain will continue Bush's dollar destruction, never ending war policy making us all poorer and more in debt.
        Here's the proof.
        http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1387395/obama_tax_bi ...

        So it looks like you should vote Obama credential.
        • dexter411, on 06/17/2008, -1/+21) Obama doesn't plan on balancing the budget; he concedes that his universal health care plan would run a deficit throughout a hypothetical Obama term
          2) 9/10 will pay less but anyone making above $250K or so would pay more. Under McCain's plan, EVERYONE would see lower taxes. This is something Dems still don't understand after Jimmy Carter, apparently.
          3) What dollars destruction do you attribute to Bush? Did Bush lower interest rates and drive up inflation? Did Bush force homeowners to buy beyond their means? No, so stfu.
        • wonderworm, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1It was Bush came out big in 2002 to call on the mortgage companies to significantly increase home ownership for the poor which was the beginning of the great housing bubble that we are in. Before this, proper underwriting standards were in place till Bush's cronies removed them and created the pay option arm and subprime no doc loans. So don't you dare try to fake facts with me because I will own your ass.

          And yes, if Iraq and our troop's survival mean nothing to you and you make 400,000 a year and all you care about is your money, then yes, you will save more money by voting for McCain, but you will still be an *****. But of course Insane McCain may easily start WWIII which will cost you much much more than some extra money. For 9 out of 10 Americans Obama will save them MORE MONEY THAN MCCAIN plus America will stop wasting Trillions in Iraq which devalues our dollar tremendously which is LOSING MONEY! (take an economics class if you can't grasp this concept). Or just read a chart tardboy. Notice how our dollar begins to crash once Bush begins to ramp up his SPENDING MACHINE and is still going down! Not a single VETO from Bush when repukes controlled congress for 6 years and caused the below chart.
          http://tfc-charts.w2d.com/chart/US/M/?saveprefs=t& ...

          You must be one of those 2 time Bush voters who got us into this mess and also probably believe in this "brainwash museum" which is why your logic is so F_cked!!!
          http://www.demonbaby.com/blog/2008/06/exploring-cr ...
          http://www.conservatipedia.com/2008/03/jesus-chris ...

          Here's to you learning how to think. you'll need alot of luck.
    • thatsmyaibo, on 06/16/2008, -13/+11CHANGE? I'm sick of these marketing slogans. He won't do anything spectacular so stop drinking the kool aid. Everybody is falling for him because he has a nice smile and some charisma. I'm not saying he would be a bad leader but I don't think he will change this country as much as his campaign states it will.
      • BIOHazard87, on 06/16/2008, -9/+11So true, just listen to Ron Paul. He totally owned Obama. Obama doesn't want change, he wants the status quo.
      • forgottenhope, on 06/16/2008, -7/+6What is this change? Obabama is going to change what?
      • lennybird, on 06/16/2008, -5/+3I think you're missing the point. People have hope and optimism for him. He's our last chance - he HAS to bring about change, or some disastrous consequences will otherwise occur. Compared to the candidates, he is the most likely to bring about change. Sure he's only part of the executive branch, and the meat of what our government does - is in Congress, but the president has great influence: look what the waste of a life president Bush, did.
    • Baldar, on 06/16/2008, -1/+3I prefer to have bills in my pocket personally. But if it's just change you want, then I guess you can vote for him.
      • puncturevine, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1Bills in your pocket ? Oh, you must be one of bush's ultra-wealthy, who can't stand the idea of "the great unwashed", the under-priviledged folk, being given opportunities to excel....folk like Barack Obama, who didn't come from much, financially, but who obviously has a wealth to share with this country.
        • Baldar, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Nope, I'm middle class, just struggling to pay the bills in the current economy.

          And I'm all for giving the "under-priviledged folk" a chance to succeed, however, how is making them rely on the government teat giving that to them? It doesn't. How well have our current welfare programs worked? They haven't. Basic economics teaches that if the government wants more of something, they subsidize it. Aren't welfare checks in essence a subsidization of poverty?

          Handing people money does nothing for them. I am all for them succeeding, but in a real sense, not the sense you seem to think in which "success = barely eating and living in section 8 housing". If we're going to spend money on these people, shouldn't it be spent trying to get them out of the system instead of relying on it? There is nothing I would love more than to see them succeed, getting marketable job skills or better yet - starting their own businesses. Give them the happiness of being able to take pride in their own accomplishments, the pride of being the bread winners for their own families. That is success, your vision of success for them is oppression and living on government crumbs.

          To add to an old proverb, "Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, you feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to run a fishery, you feed a village for a lifetime and more".

          That is what we should be doing, getting them off the system, not subsidizing them living in poverty.
    • Sherman901, on 06/16/2008, -3/+4you're an idiot... especially for that whole CHANGE thing you threw in there. lame as *****.
    • CoMpUtErITGuY, on 06/16/2008, -4/+4I'm ready for the CHANGE!

      Change your underwear. Obama's not winning.
    • indiansfred, on 06/16/2008, -5/+2Change? Yet another effeminate, drug using Harvard graduate with no real accomplishments - JUST LIKE BUSH! DOH! Obama and Bush have more in common with each other's careers than McCain and Bush. I know, I know - THE TRUTH HURTS! Really, our nation can't handle yet ANOTHER Harvard IDIOT with no common sense but who "seems nice when appearing on TV but doesn't say anything meaningful"!
    • jonnyboy1544, on 06/16/2008, -2/+1So eloquent...
    • JohnnyXmas, on 06/16/2008, -5/+3He's going to screw over every single one of us who has put forth the massive effort it takes to make ourselves comfortably wealthy, and make it easier for the lazy lower class to keep being lazy.

      ***** Obama.
      • puncturevine, on 06/16/2008, -1/+0Obama came from "lower class", but obviously he put in the massive effort required. The "lower class" are sometimes in that situation due to their own laziness, but often it is lack of support, opportunity, and direction. What he is talking about, in this speech, is asking those with who think it's ok "to just not be in jail", to get a job, askng those who think it's ok to just have a job, to get a better job, and asking those who have the better jobs to start a business, and create jobs for others. This was in the speech......he obviously isn't looking to hand out money to those who aren't willing to do something with themselves when given the opportunity.
  • sobpanic, on 06/15/2008, -17/+75Imagine how quickly the effect of the smear machine and of blind hate will fade if this video finds its way to enough values voters, blue collar workers, hillary feminists, and open minded conservatives.
    • dualboy24, on 06/16/2008, -4/+13Rather slowly over at http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/ they seem to be firmly in place against Barak :( the funny thing is the few who said they would support him seem to be missing from the forums now, probably banned. Really at what point should they just change the domain to iSupportMccainOutOfStupidityForum.net and stop being a disgrace and an insult to Hillary.
      • charm803, on 06/16/2008, -0/+11You know, I'm really disappointed in Hillary.

        Look at Ron Paul, he totally lost the race and instead of being sore loser, he has taken a step of leadership because he really wants to make a difference.

        I think that HIllary wanted the presidential post for the wrong reasons, or else she would have taken a more pro-active role with her newly gained followers.
      • brettmurf, on 06/16/2008, -1/+6My god. I went there and one of the sticky posts were "This Forum is NOT "Pro-Fox" - But Fox Is the Only Station Critiquing Obama!"
        That forum is painful to just browse the topics of. I don't think I will be delving too far into the actual substance of it.
      • jayzer, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2I made one completely reasonable post there a couple of weeks back. They were discussing whether or not Obama should pander to Hillary supporters, and I stated that I thought it would be a wasted effort for him to do so, because most Hillary supporters had made up their minds long ago whether or not to support Obama in the event that he won the nomination.

        I was polite, and didn't make it overly obvious that I support Obama. Fifteen minutes later, I was banned.

        Maybe they've adopted a zero-tolerance policy due to past experience with Obama-trolls, I don't know.
    • orca94, on 06/16/2008, -13/+8Open minded conservatives? Now those are rare.
      • JPamplin, on 06/16/2008, -2/+5Oh?

        I'm a lifelong republican, one of those "less taxes, less spending" fiscal conservative kind of guys. But I am also socially moderate (pro-choice, in favor of some federally sponsored programs like the FDA, energy, and research sponsorships).

        Let me tell you something from the other side of the aisle:

        Most people in America think as I do - don't waste our tax dollars, government can't solve everything - but we all see that we need a leader. Congress will do what it has always done, a single guy can't change much of that. However, a single person CAN unite the public behind certain principles, which will influence public policy.

        Obama is a fantastic leader, and I'm 110% behind him. I have LOTS of conservative friends who think as I do.
      • Baldar, on 06/16/2008, -4/+4Open minded liberals are even rarer. Digg is a great example of this. Make an anti-obama comment, even a well thought out one, and see how fast you're buried into hell.
        • SammyJr, on 06/16/2008, -1/+2Show me a well thought out anti-Obama comment. I've noticed 3 distinct varieties of anti-Obama comments:

          1. Posts that accuse him of being a far left leaning liberal/socialist who will take your guns. Of course, the posts don't go into actual issues, they just throw out labels.
          2. Posts that emphasize Obama's middle name.
          3. Posts that accuse him of being a Muslim and in the same breath criticize his membership in a Christian Church.

          None of those are particularly well thought out.
        • byronm, on 06/16/2008, -2/+2You obviously have no concept of what a "liberal" is.

          Liberal: Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
        • Baldar, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalism

          Try again. This is the definition most people think of when used in the context it is going to be used here.
        • Baldar, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Here's a whole article that doesn't put a halo over Obama's head, which actually talks about things of substance (policy)

          http://digg.com/business_finance/Uncle_Sam_can_fun ...

          How does this get 7 diggs, yet rehearsed speeches on fathers day are front page news?

          Open minded here? Doesn't look like it. Anything that questions the messiah gets buried, while if we washes his hands after he pees it's front page news.
    • buggles, on 06/16/2008, -9/+10Don't forget, Obama is a pretty far left leaning liberal. You don't need to be filled with "hate" and slander to disagree with many of the things he is likely to stand for.

      The "smear machine", as you like to call it, appears to run both directions. Like calling anyone who disagrees with you a "hate monger" or insert any other over-the-top slant to insinuate a phobic condition.
      • sobpanic, on 06/16/2008, -3/+3Yep, that's why I didn't say it would win everyone over to his side, but I do think it can fairly serve to diffuse the a false perception of the man being pushed by some elements of the right wing (and yes, even some elements of the left wing too). There are plenty of legitimate reasons to not support Obama, I have no quarrel with that -- though I might have a debate. But the truth is that its looking like purely on merits, Obama is doing really well with would be supporters, so smears and distortions are becoming a necessity for the other side.
    • LukasSmith, on 06/16/2008, -5/+4How will this disappear?
      http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=5 ...
      oh yeah liberal media.
      • sodade, on 06/16/2008, -0/+4If it is true (I didn't bother reading), then that makes Obama an even better example for people to follow. Oh man - Obama's dad ass raped him regularly as a child and he STILL ends up being a constitutional scholar and presidential nominee. The more you idiots bring up this kind of crap, the better Obama looks to the non-douchebag voters.
      • UknowWho97, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Can you idiots please come up with something that Obama did HIMSELF! I don't care what people around him did, I care about the man himself, HE is the one running for President, not his dad (who was not even in barack's life except for one visit to hawaii when barack was a kid) or his pastor or anyone else.
      • LukasSmith, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1He lied in a book to win. Seems to be my point. Not that his daddy is a douchebag.
    • jabberwolf, on 06/16/2008, -2/+1Maybe he has some vented up anger at his own black father for leaving him for a violent socialist revolution in Kenya? Or is there still come excuses and fondness wanting to imitate his father?

      Either way, on fathers day, its about celebrating ALL fathers of ALL races.

      Or did the liberal community forget that?
  • mark076h, on 06/16/2008, -97/+16wow what a boring, unimportant speech , it did not even deserve to get submitted to digg, buried as lame
    • wild, on 06/16/2008, -7/+36You should just turn in your username and log back on to myspace for the next 8+ years. The speeches are just going ot get better and more important.
    • PATSCRU, on 06/16/2008, -5/+31troll much?
    • TotalHalibut, on 06/16/2008, -3/+8You're obviously not a father.
  • mark076h, on 06/16/2008, -82/+16LOL here it is, this is what an Obamatard looks like on digg http://digg.com/users/cg4et/history/submissions
    • charm803, on 06/16/2008, -12/+5You want to know what a diggerturd looks like???

      Look in the mirror!

      buahahaha!
    • consoneo, on 06/16/2008, -3/+6He seems to have pretty evenly distributed his postings on politics...
  • dcoolidge, on 06/16/2008, -24/+27A much better speaker than the neo-con puppet heads they elect...
  • sleepyjjk, on 06/16/2008, -13/+140I love what he said about 8th grade graduations - how parents make graduating from the 8th grade a big deal when the children are already supposed to graduate from the 8th grade. Now, graduating from high school, going to college and going further is something to celebrate about.

    Anyway, as far as the speech goes, time and time again, it shows that Obama can face the hard truths of reality. For me at least, it doesn't seem like he's saying these things in order to win votes, but he's saying these things because he truly finds them troubling and knows that there needs to be a solution for all of this - that the status quo isn't enough.

    He's definitely acting like a wonderful leader, facing these problems head on. This is something that doesn't come along too often people, we should take advantage of it while we can.
    • TheOther1, on 06/16/2008, -27/+5Yes, he is ACTING like a wonderful leader. Anyone can act.
      Bury me Obomabots
      • nblsavage, on 06/16/2008, -2/+19Ok, explain the logic in posting a comment that is nothing but an insult and then acting indignant about being dugg down.
      • Ajajadude, on 06/16/2008, -2/+12Better than what we have now: someone who's just a bad leader and can't even act otherwise.
      • Hillsfar, on 06/16/2008, -2/+15We can tell a lot from Obama and McCain in how they act. Actions speak louder than words.

        Obama taking action on the Midwest Floods.
        McCain not.
    • smackjack, on 06/16/2008, -0/+9I love how he brought up Chris Rock

      "I take care of my kids!"

      "You're supposed to you dumb *****!"
    • Baldar, on 06/16/2008, -5/+4"He's definitely acting like a wonderful leader" - This phrase makes me think of Kim Jong Il... They had the "Great Leader" and "Dear Leader" in North Korea, why do we have to get the "Wonderful Leader"?
  • jontalisman, on 06/16/2008, -68/+23I like the part where he healed the lame and made the blind see.
    • dinot, on 06/16/2008, -1/+4Looks like he missed you, though.
      • jontalisman, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1No, he got me in Cleveland. I was the one in the wheelchair who had his legs regrown.
    • docsimmons, on 06/16/2008, -1/+3He is God for the Godless
      • jontalisman, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1Ooh, good line. I'll have to remember that one for my Sunday School class.
    • jontalisman, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1No, he got me in Cleveland. I was the one in the wheelchair who had his legs regrown.
  • jontalisman, on 06/16/2008, -67/+21Oh, but the best was when he fed everybody afterwards with 5 loaves and two fish.
    • silverbulletky, on 06/16/2008, -0/+13I thought it would have been when he turned the water into wine
      • jontalisman, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2Nah, they don't drink in that church during the services. At least, not while the Messiah's there.
      • flashingcurser, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1He surpassed Hillery, he's past the first miracle.
    • flashingcurser, on 06/16/2008, -0/+4So what do you have against bread and fish?
  • borez, on 06/16/2008, -21/+12The revolution is being Internetized.
    • barackoblogger, on 06/16/2008, -1/+6and internalized
    • appleseed1234, on 06/16/2008, -3/+2I hope not. Internet endorsement has proven to be largely a death sentence for whatever it touches.
  • WTF69, on 06/16/2008, -38/+18Great speech unfortunatly it will not solve our economic and foreign policy situation. How do you expect a kid to have a father if he is in Iraq or in Iran or if hes on the street because of the country's failing economy. Barack needs to fix our economy and stop our preemptive strike foreign policy. Unfortunately he doesn't provide a specific ways he will solve these issues. We don't need empty promises of change. Lets not even talk about neocon macain who if elected will drive our country to a complete disaster.
    • nblsavage, on 06/16/2008, -9/+25http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/
      http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
      http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/
    • Ajajadude, on 06/16/2008, -6/+7Yeah, what we need is Superman. And not just any Superman. But a Superman who can singlehandedly do everything without the support of the people or Congress.

      The President is nothing without the support of the people and Congress. Granted, the people and Congress can be conned into giving that support, but without it the President is nothing.
      • VCubed, on 06/16/2008, -2/+5Sarcasm intended, I presume. Barack always says he's asking us to believe in our ability to change Washington, not just his - that's why he's so loved, yep, actually loved even by political cynics. That doesn't mean we think he's the messiah, just that he's a good man. Kind of like Russert, not perfect, just a good guy who tried a lot harder than the rest.
    • Hillsfar, on 06/16/2008, -4/+10What makes you think "Don't know much about the economy" McCain and "Bomb Iran" McCain will fix our economy or stop our pre-emptive strike foreign policy?
    • charm803, on 06/16/2008, -5/+3I think that him, and what Hillary has done for women, is give hope to many who would never think an African American would come so far in a presidential election.

      At this point, even if he loses, I doubt that he would disappear from his newly found political power and hopefully this will inspire a new generation.

      But let's face it, the speech did call out the parents, to have higher standards for their children. Parents, ultimately, have a lot of responsibility in rearing their child, and that's what he was saying.
    • brettmurf, on 06/16/2008, -2/+5Well, to be honest if the average parent was able to properly raise their child, we would start fixing the economy up rather rapidly. A huge chunk of America is basically retarded. Bring them up to a better level and get rid of all the people needing welfare as well as the public having an understanding of foreign issues, and I think we would be amazed at how quickly our country would turn around. So I guess he did just give a solution.

      However, people are people, and they will not rise to responsibility themselves.
    • TotalHalibut, on 06/16/2008, -3/+9If Obama told you absolutely everything, every speech he did, not only would it be hours long, it would be really ***** repetitive.

      Take this for what it is, a well-crafted speech on the issues of fatherhood and family values, and accept that these are important in our society, regardless of whether or not you are privy to them.
  • WESTEE, on 06/16/2008, -38/+9we know who his baby mama is, but who is his baby fatha?
  • kelstock, on 06/16/2008, -22/+33This man has the values and integrity to repair this country - in the home, at home, and abroad.
    • joe122370, on 06/16/2008, -2/+3where are your facts to back this statement?
    • wonderworm, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2Your comment is a little cheezy but it is still very very true.

      And for joe. The facts are right in front of you as you can see everyday his strong family values and his comittment to refuse all lobbyist money from the entire democratic party shows his integrity.

      And just go ask any European what they think of Obama and how the now suspicious view they hold of Americans due to Bush will change overnight into the entire world being proud of American's amazing ability to lead the world for positive change.
  • TheOther1, on 06/16/2008, -33/+10People are acting like this is some kind of earth shattering revelation instead of common knowledge simply because The Messiah uttered it. Haven't people been saying the same thing for years and been called racists? Even Cosby caught a lot of flack and was even called a race traitor for saying essentially the same thing.
    • Ajajadude, on 06/16/2008, -3/+16Which is why it's a big deal. It seems that black people might actually be willing to listen to Obama even if he's saying the ugly truth that needs to be said. If that's the case, then more power to him.

      How often do you hear presidential candidates telling a group of people a truth that they don't want to hear? But, you're right, ***** it. Since all the others before him who have said it failed miserably, let's just let the topic die.
    • charm803, on 06/16/2008, -3/+9The people that had a problem with it were people who most likely hate the truth. But this applies to all races, not just black people. All across the board. Close to where I live, there's a lot of white people on welfare and in front of target pan handling. It knows no boundaries. All races are flawed, but we can, as a society, be better people.

      Like Chris Rock once said that you shouldn't be quick to point out stupid things like:
      "I take care of MY kid."
      "YOU'RE supposed to take care of your kid, mother fVCKER!" -Chris Rock

    • Aitese, on 06/16/2008, -3/+9You notice the part where Obama was able to point out the truth WITHOUT calling the people he was pointing it out to "knuckleheads"?

      I think THAT might have been where the good Dr Cosby went a little wrong.
  • p0s3r, on 06/16/2008, -44/+12Now he's stealing Cosby's material. Can this moron come up with one original idea, for once?
    • malex, on 06/16/2008, -4/+12So, do you disagree with anything he said, or do you just hate the messenger more?
      • masterm1nd, on 06/16/2008, -6/+6How you got 'he hates Obama as a person' out of that I will never know.
        • Dang3rousd, on 06/16/2008, -4/+6Now he's ***stealing*** Cosby's material. Can this ***moron*** come up with ***one original*** idea, for ***once***?

          I'd say pretty much all of the starred stuff give us a pretty good idea about what his opinion of Obama is.
        • masterm1nd, on 06/16/2008, -4/+5I thought he implied he doesn't like (didn't say nor imply hate) phony stolen messages, not the the messenger.
        • drvcr, on 06/16/2008, -1/+2Idealist much?

          p0s3r is the Hillary diehard who constantly spewed spiteful messages regarding Obama during the primary season. While he has the right to do so, don't just sit there and claim that it's a stretch to imply he hates Obama.
        • malex, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1_Hillary_ diehard? I'm pretty sure Poser has exactly as much support for Clinton as Limbaugh does.

          And to answer Masterm1nd's question, just take a peek at his comment history. Any of it.
  • barackoblogger, on 06/16/2008, -12/+49Cosby spoke in a way that was demeaning toward black women. His tone was not the same as Barack Obama's. Obama speaks in a way that does not make people feel defensive and they are open to hearing him.

    Here's Cosby's speech. Read the difference.
    http://www.mishalov.com/bill-cosby-naacp.html
    • ZenMojo, on 06/16/2008, -8/+7Bill Cosby's an ***** and has always been an *****. Hell, Eddie Murphy was ripping his ***** open back in the 80's to cheering black audiences.

      Barack Obama's just delivering the same message that black leaders have been delivering for decades. For the first time we have a valid presidential candidate who actually understands and has a true view of the black community.
      • richito, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0probably the same black audiences cheering reverend wright.
    • silverbulletky, on 06/16/2008, -8/+2GOD BLESS AMERICA?? GOD DAMN AMERICA!!!!
    • lgm1213, on 06/16/2008, -7/+8No, people eat up anything Obama says as gold, while figures like bill Cosby are demonized because he speaks truth. The Truth hurts and no one wants to hear it. Obama is just pandering. Couldn't he have left out fathers day as a non political day and not made it about race either. Fatherhood has no race, class, or economic status, why couldn't he give this speech last week instead.
    • bmcnally, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2Actually, they are very similar.

      The only difference is that Obama is a politician giving a speech on Father's Day, while Cosby is a celebrity decrying the failures of a community in which he grew up. Both of them have a stake - Obama because of his non-existent father, and Cosby because of him seeing the degradation of his home community.

      Cosby said it before. But no one wanted to listen because he wasn't the Golden Boy.
      • ProUSADigger, on 06/16/2008, -2/+0Be careful around here...you'll be called "racist" for using the term "Boy" regarding the Obamessiah.
  • barackoblogger, on 06/16/2008, -8/+15This isn't the first time he's talked about fatherhood. Here is his statement from last father's day:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CURvgDRDg3M&feature ...
    • VCubed, on 06/16/2008, -1/+6Thanks, that's truly a wonderful, heartfelt diary he did last year. I looked at how much his girls have grown this past year, and could just see how he wished he'd been there more.
  • digitronix, on 06/16/2008, -27/+14"Yes we need fewer guns in the hands of people who shouldn't have them. Yes we need more money for our schools, and more outstanding teachers in the classroom. And more after-school programs for our children. Yes we need more jobs and more job training in our community. We know all that."

    This may be true, but it's not the government's job to supply these things. First off, this country is $9.2 trillion in debt with almost $40 trillion in obligations, due to unconstitutional spending such as Obama's proposed solutions. Throwing more money into education is not change, it's President Bush's current policy!

    The action the politicians need to take to help the black communities (which Obama never talks about):

    1) Abolish the IRS
    2) Create a more sound currency. The dollar is crashing right now, and the poorest feel it the worst.
    3) End the illegal drug wars.
    4) We need the government to treat each citizen as individuals, not as members of a group.
    5) Give individuals more freedom with their property and income.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-369903422 ...
    • Hillsfar, on 06/16/2008, -9/+5You somehow think McCain will lead us out of debt or stop the tax cuts for the rich?
      • digitronix, on 06/16/2008, -4/+12No
        • Bartboy919, on 06/16/2008, -3/+2The what the hell are you complaining about?
        • digitronix, on 06/16/2008, -3/+2The liberal policy of increased funding for social programs.

          What in the world is wrong with people's reading comprehension these days?
    • pilot3033, on 06/16/2008, -4/+61) It is the government's responsibility to provide for it's citizens because our (the US) system is that of representational democracy; the people are the government. Taxes pay for things, how do you get out of debit? Cut war spending. I think we can agree there. The government should always provide a sound educational system, abolishing the IRS puts an already dreadful school system in even greater danger.

      2) Is much more complicated than you think. You can't just "create" a strong currency, no matter how bad we want one.

      3) No disagreement from me. Legalize pot and all that. (I'm still pretty convinced that anything beyond that should remain illegal though. Heroin is not something that should be freely available.

      4) Then vote for people who you think do. You are the government, and it starts at the local level. Not state, not even county, I'm talking about your local city council and below. That's where it starts. Getting involved at these local levels can have a tremendous impact on life around you, and can extend outwards to broader levels of government.

      5) As far as I know, the government hasn't told me where I can and can't spend my money except for Cuba (but people do anyway). We could use some tax reform, yes, but nothing that strikes me as a critical issue.

      We have a great system in this country... I hate it when people complain about "the government" like it is some separate entity that they can not control, quite the opposite is true when you boil it down to local levels, and as I have said before: the effect extends upwards and outwards. Extreme solutions like abolishing the IRS, or trying to convert to a "true" free market are just impossible. We have too much of an established economy to restructure on that massive of a scale. And in order to do so would require much more government leadership than many who advocate it would like. You can't just say "OK everyone! No more regulations...GO!" With already large corporations that have major markets cornered and are just ***** massive, competition would just disappear. They would have no incentive to compete with each other at all.

      Lastly, I'll note that president bush's policy for education is more standardized testing for more funding. This approach has been proven to fail, hard, because it forces schools to drop subjects that are not really covered on the funding test. The answer there is giving states more cash to fund the construction of new schools and hire more and better educators to reduce class size, encourage students in math, science, and the humanities, as well as offering art, music and sports to as many children as you can. (ideally that is, simply increasing an education budget to hire more teachers can do wonders).

      • digitronix, on 06/16/2008, -1/+2"It is the government's responsibility to provide for it's citizens because our (the US) system is that of representational democracy; the people are the government."

        Are you sure you were reading the US constitution? Because I can't find anywhere in the constitution that it is the role of the government to take wealth from a group by force and redistribute it to the underprivileged. Is that in Article 1 section 8, or were you just making that up?

        Also, the federal income tax is unconstitutional, since the 16th amendment was not properly ratified.

        It seems a little contradictory for you to say that the government starts with local communities. Shouldn't education therefore be the role of communities and not the federal government?

        And about drastic changes, look up on the web how much debt the government generates every single day. And you think our economy is well fixed such that we shouldn't make drastic changes to change course?
        • diespectra, on 06/16/2008, -0/+3I don't remember off the top of my head if the constitution mentioned anything about education but if I'm remembering right from history class land owners were required to set a small portion of their land aside to be used for schools.

          Keeping the IRS around just for the small portion that it provides to education is ridiculous imo though. The states can handle it much better.
        • Baldar, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2The Consitution mentions nothing about education. It does set up a framework for the federal government having very few responsibilities, and those of the congress being listed in Article 1 Section 8. The 10th amendment then goes on to very clearly state that anything powers not given to the federal government in the constitution are then given to the state. So, as far as public schools go, they should be the responsibility of the state, if the state wants them at all.

          Besides, in reality, what does the department of education REALLY do? Pretty much sets policies for education and distributes funding. Wouldn't it be more efficient if the money didn't have to go to DC and trickle back down to the states? Also, why is DC setting educational policies. Every state, let alone every school district has their own unique issues to deal with. A one shoe fits all policy does not work (see NCLB). Let the communities and states set the policy and deal with funding, and our education level should actually increase. We would have more dollars per student to work with (since we are cutting out a huge piece of overhead), and the policies would more fit the district that the schools are trying to serve. (So I agree with you on this point, just adding to it).

          We really need to get all three branches of government back in their boxes where the belong. The Constitution is supposed to restrict them, not us.
        • pilot3033, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Baldar:
          If School's were still a states only issue, then we would still have school segregation. The Constitution is a framework that was designed to be specifically vague. It does not provide for a federally funded education system, yes, but I don't recall it specially banning it outright.

          I don't think our education system is running particularly well, but I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bath water either.
        • digitronix, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Hint to pilot3033: Article 1 section 8 - list of the ONLY things the federal government is allowed to do. Anything not in this list is intended to be handled by the state.

          It isn't so much like throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but throwing the dead mammoth out with the bathwater.
      • diespectra, on 06/16/2008, -1/+4pilot3033pilot3033- it may be impossible to create a perfectly sound currency, but letting a private company control our nations wealth and making decisions that will affect every single one of us with out any control from congress, representing us, is a complete injustice.

        And why shouldn't all drugs be decriminalized? Who gave you the authority over my body to tell me what I can put into it?
        • pilot3033, on 06/16/2008, -0/+11) I agree with you. Private interests should not control the nations wealth. I recall advocating against such a thing (please let me know if you interpreted differently).

          2) For the same reason why we have the FDA regulate other drugs and medicines. Heroin is called as such because it was marketed in the early 20th century as a stimulant for housewives who were on their last nerve, or just needed a pick me up. When people started realizing how bad it was for you, it was banned. Unlike pot, there is a legitimate case to prove that heroin shouldn't be in things because it would be very very bad for our heath. Individually, I don't have to power, money, or resources to examine every single thing that I want to put in my body, weather it be tomatoes for salmonella, or narcotics that may or may not give me 'anal leakage.' Having a body that is directly controlled by elected officials regulate and investigate the industries allows us to consume without fear of the unknown.

          The constitution may not demand such regulatory industries, but it does provide for us to elect officials that represent us in policy making, so I vote for people who will advocate for food safety and narcotic regulation so when I go to take an antibiotic, I'm not actually ingesting something that could kill me, or when I go to make a caprese , I don't get salmonella from the tomatoes.
    • Fordi, on 06/16/2008, -5/+5Let's play "Facts on the table" for the moment.

      1) McCain is likely to continue Bush's policy direction
      1a) Obama is likely to reverse as much of Bush's damage as possible
      2) Bush has ***** up for the last four years
      3) Ron Paul will not be the republican candidate
      3a) Ron Paul will not run independent
      3b) Even if he did run, none of the third parties have sufficient support as yet to win an election
      4) Another four years of Bush policy is both unacceptable
      5) Voting for a third party essentially removes your voice from the real contest (dem v. pub)

      As such, I would suggest you vote for Obama. Or, if you *don't* think (1) or (2) are true, vote for McCain. But please, keep your voice in the actual race.
      • digitronix, on 06/16/2008, -2/+3You fail to realize that Obama is for the most part the same Bush policy, except on steroids. This includes a one-sided alliance with Israel, threatening Iran, spending more on unconstitutional programs for pretty much anything, failing to do anything about the skyrocketing debt and the crashing dollar, not willing to secure the borders, removing gun ownership rights from more Americans, the list goes on.

        So is it REALLY a contest, dem v. pub? That's why you should vote third party.
      • diespectra, on 06/16/2008, -1/+4In my mind and my family we can't in good conscious vote for Mccain or Obama. One may be slightly better on certain things than the other but overall they stand diametrically opposed to what I believe in.

        I will be voting with my mind and heart, not for who I think can win. A vote for a third party that you believe in is not a wasted vote. You may not win this time but if you push for what you believe and talk with other people about why you believe the way you do, it can create real change in the future.

        A slightly modified quote from Bill Hicks.... VOTE WITH YOUR ***** HEART
  • PeckerSlap, on 06/16/2008, -15/+2M L K
    • smilemon, on 06/16/2008, -2/+7If you downgraded the sound quality and turned the video black and white..... You could probably pass it for MLK, he will make a great president.
  • cubbiesx, on 06/16/2008, -10/+22Dugg for Chris Rock reference.
    • SwingCorey, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1he's a hack! He's "borrowed" from RFK, and now he's "borrowing" from Chris Rock.

      I'm not even hoping for an original thought - just an original way of putting it that isn't outright plagiarism.
  • smilemon, on 06/16/2008, -13/+51McCain can pray, but Obama can preach!
    • Berkana, on 06/16/2008, -4/+15Amen. McCain is less of a family man than Obama.
  • UtopiaInTheSky, on 06/16/2008, -10/+22Why isn't McCain's father's day speech on the front page? Oh yeah...
    • Bartboy919, on 06/16/2008, -7/+25His father was called Grog McCain, and he died so long ago that his body alone proves the earth is older than 6000 years old.
      • bxblox, on 06/16/2008, -8/+2I'm sorry I have to bury you. Carbon dating proves your statement is off by at least a century.
      • Mikidogo, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1dugg for Grog
    • rellimyerffej, on 06/16/2008, -22/+3cause he isn't the Messiah. And what makes Obama qualified to group all black fathers together? He isn't even african american. Someone who is of african descent who emigrated or whose ancestors emigrated after slavery abolition and jim crow laws doesn't get to claim that they are the same. And people don't need more handouts, they need to take responsibility for themselves, why is it that the asians have moved here and taken over most businesses in the ghetto and moved up in class in less than 2 generations??
      • ghostoftomjoad, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1That's because asians don't suffer from the same cultural assault that has been institutionalized by our government and the wealthy from the day blacks were first brought to America. Do you see any famous asian gangster rappers? And on top of it drug wars, poverty, prison, racism among blacks--all this stuff has been pushed on the black community because rich white people need someone to drive buses and pick up trash.
        I'm white, so I have little place to say what makes an african american. I don't know what race you are, but i do know that if your not black then you have no place to say that a man who has lived in america his entire life and has been black his entire life isn't an african american.
    • evelyn1971, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0I am with you man.
    • dilton7, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2Mccain didn't post his speech yet . He can't use a pc remember?
  • AnOMNOMymous, on 06/16/2008, -51/+3ONLY ELECT OSAMA IF U WANT AMERICA TO BE THE NEXT MIDDLE EAST! HE'S A CLOSET TERRORIST THAT HATES AMERICA! BEWARE!!!!!!!!!!
    • spanglegluppet, on 06/16/2008, -1/+17I can't decide whether you're being facetious or just stupid. I shall digg you down anyway.
    • beachian, on 06/16/2008, -0/+7Ohhh, well this changes everything. Thanks, AnOMNOMymous.
    • greatawakening, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0I knew something was off. I'll be sure to find you when he's standing in front of the White House in 2009 burning an American flag, while sacrificing children simultaneously in the name of his alleged leader, Allah. People like you are so severely unhinged that we need to ship you off to Guantanamo, instead of the "terrorists". You are the true terrorists - mindless idiots who promote America as a terror-stricken nation. And, for anyone who replied to this thread, can someone answer me as to why when these mindless idiots decide to post, they always type in caps?
    • AnOMNOMymous, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0If you couldn't detect the facetious trolling diarrhea that I spewed out of my intranetz mouth, you should kiss a baby.
  • jazgold, on 06/16/2008, -13/+21interesting that he used the words "AWOL" and "MIA" to talk about the dads' absences... trying to make people think about the war subconsciously? interesting choice. many of the fathers are probably oversees in the army...
    • bparkey, on 06/16/2008, -1/+11Yeah because absentee fathers wasn't an issue during peace time. Not to mention there is a huge difference between a father who is caring for his family and providing for them by being in the military and one who is a sperm donor and nothing else.
    • rellimyerffej, on 06/16/2008, -3/+8i gaurantee you that fathers that are in the Armed Services provide the kind of parenting that Obama is referring to. He isn't talking about being away at war you idiots, he's talking about not taking responsibility for getting a girl pregnant. Personal responsibility, usually a conservative mantra......oh wait...he is going to create it with government programs...there's the liberal I know.
      • azpat, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2Define Program. He's talking about the kind of programs that involve responsible people like you and me getting up off our asses and helping out someone besides ourselves. He, more than anyone in my life, inspires me to make that change, to be a part of that change. He's not talking about welfare, he's challenging the rest of us to be the difference.
    • Fordi, on 06/16/2008, -1/+17I think you're reading in more than is there.
  • koft, on 06/16/2008, -5/+29What we really need is for McCain to encourage black men to take care of their families. ROFL, I would LOVE to see that. The media would have a field day with it.
    • Fordi, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2No, no. He needs to try to get an endorsement from Katt Williams. *****, I'd just love to see film of that meeting.
    • coyote1284, on 06/16/2008, -2/+9"ZOMG! McCain's RACIST hate-speech! He's showing his true bigoted, neo-con colors now!"
  • credential101, on 06/16/2008, -19/+6He looks down so much without a teleprompter.
    • charm803, on 06/16/2008, -3/+9You pick the most absurd thing to nit pick at. Really?

      You should be thankful this candidate prepared a speech to eloquently speak, and bringing up things like hip hop and low expectations, and many will accuse him of talking to black people....so yeah, he needs to come across with a point without being defensive.

      Sure beats the hell out of McCain's mumbles!
    • BillMoocho, on 06/16/2008, -2/+13I'm not sure how good your memory is, but I don't know anybody who can memorize a 23 minute speech.
      • credential101, on 06/16/2008, -8/+2I don't know how good your memory is, but whenever a person speaks; they usually don't have it scripted out.
        • Wartyboskfapped, on 06/16/2008, -0/+7Most people aren't running for President. Most people are morons.

          People should think before they speak.
      • DoTheFandango, on 06/16/2008, -1/+7@credential
        Talk to anyone that has ever delivered an actual important speech.
      • lgm1213, on 06/16/2008, -2/+3what about actors they memorize hundreds of pages to go on stage. And movements to go with it.
        • Cloud7654, on 06/16/2008, -2/+1Yes but they film movies scene by scene and go over their lines before each take to make sure they get it right. It's quite different than memorizing a speech where you only have one shot to get it right.
        • flashingcurser, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1The difference is that actors don't do a different play every day.

          @cloud I'm pretty sure he is talking about theater not tv/movies/youtube.
    • Timetheos, on 06/16/2008, -2/+1And yet he his a much better speech giver than McBush.
  • sputza, on 06/16/2008, -5/+28What an excellent public speaker. He speaks with such confidence and heart its hard not to listen to what he has to say. If he were running for Prime Minister here in Canada, I would vote for him without a doubt.
    • AlexBryan, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2Same here if he was running for PM in the UK, he's a much more inspirational speaker and I believe would be a much better leader than Brown or Cameron could ever be.

      He's the best thing that could to happen to the US right now.
      • flashingcurser, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2Alex, you know as president, he will have to make decisions that are not popular with Brits/Europeans. He will have to be responsive to the people he represents and that will conflict at times with European interests. Will his speaking ability override those tough decisions he will have to make?

        (Put aside the flameproof jacket a second, it's an honest, non-loaded, question).
        • r00fus, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1FC,
          I think Brits and Euros know that the POTUS will do and support things they are against.

          They still see him as a better candidate than McCain (and much better than Bush).

          Why is that?
    • ProUSADigger, on 06/16/2008, -2/+1So you guys are literally saying that you can be fooled, by the words of one guy, into voting for somebody to lead your country? Useful idtiots, indeed.

      I can probably guess, though, that you would never forgive President Bush for believing that Iraq had WMD's. Am I right? Oh nevermind...
    • HappyScrappy, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1You don't vote for Prime Minister, right?

      You just vote for your MPs and then they elect a PM, right?
  • nastronomical, on 06/16/2008, -25/+16The white man has been saying this exact same thing for years now....however, its called racism.
    • sugarazor, on 06/16/2008, -3/+5Yes... because the white man laid the groundwork for these issues.
      • obelisky, on 06/16/2008, -1/+2exactly
      • lgm1213, on 06/16/2008, -1/+2The white man did not lay down the foundation of father abandonment, that happens in all cultures...
      • drvcr, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1In the case of African Americans, yes the white male has played a part in the issue of father abandonment.

        If you don't believe me, brush up on your history especially your history of slavery and economic policy during the early 19th century.

        While I don't agree with the current strategy of the black community to blame certain societal issues on other races, you can't expect a group of people to completely transform their ability to succeed in 40-50 years after undergoing 300 years of slavery and jim crowe.

        It's just not realistic.
        • sugarazor, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Put it better than I ever could. I'm not making excuses, even Obama said in his speech that the black community needs to stop relying on the excuse of slavery; but when white people make comments like the one above, it just shows how out of touch they are with the black America.

          I'm not sure if the above comment would be perceived as racist, but it's just one of those things that makes you say, "really? You want to go down that road?" It's so hard to think about a world where black people were treated like absolute ***** and it was only sixty years ago that the country STARTED to act right.
    • ZenMojo, on 06/16/2008, -4/+3Black people have been saying it for years. White people just have no perspective.

      For instance, I could tell white people that they're a privileged class in society and that they need to stop whining about affirmative action because the net effect is less than a percent of a percent on college admissions. I could tell evangelical whites that maybe they should stop voting pro-war and calling themselves pro-life advocates. I could tell Southern whites that they really are a bunch of racists and they need to start calling out people when they hear racist jokes -- and yes, I grew up in the South.

      It might very well be true, but being a black man, many white people would call me a "reverse racist" for saying it.
      • JointVenture, on 06/16/2008, -2/+8I could tell urban blacks that they are uneducated, violent racists who use the word ***** to begin finish their sentances....blah blah blah
      • coyote1284, on 06/16/2008, -0/+3"Everyone's a little bit racist" -Avenue Q
        Admit it, you laugh when a commedian on BET is talking about "white people" just as much as when talking about others, I laugh, too. If something is offensive, it should ALWAYS be offensive, irrespective of source. Why can't we all discuss and even make light of an issue without being instantly assumed racist? You overhear me talking about fried chicken, watermellon, and grape soda, you cry racism, but I'm just talking about my lunch yesterday.
      • Pittance, on 06/16/2008, -1/+2There is a difference in much of the South these days.One of the cultures that black subgroups populate encourage drug use, violence, infidelity to a partner, and glorifcation of crime. I think a lot of the "racists" you see these days are more "culterists" than anything. Only really REALLY dumb people hate someone because they are more tan than others. Usually its because of what a person's actions and appearance say about their life choices.
    • boojah, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2Men has been saying this for years now. It doesnt matter who says it, or who said it first. You two (nas, zen) are both wrong in bringing up something that doesnt belong in this society, race. I find the word race being misused so much. To me race is what you call human race. What matters is the message, and ithat it is true. Let all that stupid history go and look to the future instead. Stop acting foolish and say that "white people" have said it, or that "white people" just have no perspective. You think you are right, but you are both wrong. Stop feeding racism!!
  • mshtml, on 06/16/2008, -18/+73 cheers for the next globalist CFR president. Keep the spam a comin'.
    • Oozinator, on 06/16/2008, -2/+8Globalism is here to stay, it is no longer a central question in America's interaction with the world. The 1890's have come and past. The Council on Foreign Relations keeps America on some sort of unnatural globalist track no more than clothes designers work to frustrate all of our collective desires to conduct public life in the nude.
      • mshtml, on 06/16/2008, -3/+1At least you're aware of the current century...
    • TotalHalibut, on 06/16/2008, -5/+8Paulbots go home please. Libertarianism only works on paper.
      • mshtml, on 06/16/2008, -4/+3Liberty only works on paper?
      • diespectra, on 06/16/2008, -3/+1Yeah Libertarianism only works on paper... It's called the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
        • coyote1284, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1How is that working out for us BTW?
      • esteskid, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1all philosophies only work on paper

        i believe however that our ever expanding government could use a little libertarianism at the moment

        but i'm all out of options, i'm not a huge fan the pandering Bob Barr, and anyone with half a brain knows whats killing our economy the most is the war deficit, so i'm going to have to vote for this guy
      • TotalHalibut, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1Liberty and Libertarianism are not the same thing. We like liberty, yes, but do we necessarily like the gold standard, tiny government, very little regulation, and an isolationist foreign policy? Liberty isn't black and white, it's shades of grey, and there's a marked difference between giving your citizens freedom, and being irresponsible.
        • mshtml, on 06/16/2008, -1/+1First, they are the same thing.

          The gold standard prevents runaway government spending and cripples inflation. Money is anchored to a fixed price and can't be mass produced from the printing press. This would keep oil and food prices low and stable.

          We don't need big government. Concepts such as personal responsibility, self determination and free markets apply here.

          An isolationist foreign policy is what we have right now. We're pissing off the world with preemptive strikes and imposing sanctions on anyone who defies the empire.

          Its a low flame, you can't feel the water coming to a boil.
        • TotalHalibut, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1You are evidently confused. We currently have an exceptionally negative interventionist foreign policy. We've declared war on and occupied countries on the basis that they 'might' be harboring terrorists, or 'might have weapons of mass destruction', yet refuse to deploy our troops to prevent genocides or support humanitarian causes. Ron Paul's policies advocated isolationism, not getting involved in ANYTHING, and shutting ourselves off from the world. This is a swing in completely the wrong direction, and will do nothing to improve international relations. What would you think, if you were a foreign power, when you've just experienced 8 years of neo-con foreign policy and then suddenly all goes quiet, doors get shut, windows get barred, and shutters get slammed? Dunno about you, but I'd start getting really nervous at that point. International relations are shaky enough as it is without that kind of silliness going on. Also note Paul voted against intervening in the Darfur Genocide. He is not a humanitarian, he only cares about what's going on in this country. That's a pretty selfish way of viewing the world, but then, what can you expect from a guy who denies and opposes globalism in all it's forms at every turn?

          And yeah, you do need big government, because you cannot be trusted, and neither can the corporations, who are already running away with record profits due to lack of regulation and the unwillingness of the government to step in and crack down on their corruption. Libertarianism wants the market to govern itself. Good luck trying to get oil prices down with less regulation rather than more.
        • diespectra, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1We never actually declared war.

          "Ron Paul's policies advocated isolationism, not getting involved in ANYTHING, and shutting ourselves off from the world."

          This is completely untrue. If you've ever actually listened to what Ron Paul has said you would know this. He is a non-interventionalist not an isolationist. He has repeatedly said we should increase trades and dialogs with all nations and that we can only intervene with a majority vote from congress. We are not the cops of the world.

          So we can't be trusted but government can is what you're saying. Even though governments killed more people last century than any other unnatural cause. You have no concept of what this country was founded on. You are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
  • ejpusa, on 06/16/2008, -6/+44Is it just me, but doesn't it seem that McCain is really not interested in being President? I just feel his heart is not in it. He seems like he is just going through the motions now.

    I have this itchy feeling that the Republicans are going to do a switch-o-roo and we are NOT going to see McCain run against Obama, but someone from left field. Just a feeling ..... Don't the futures markets have Obama by by 15 pts now?
    • JointVenture, on 06/16/2008, -6/+12Digg is an echo chamber, you might want to get out of the cave ever once and awhile.
      • byronm, on 06/16/2008, -1/+2Digg is an echo chamber, it reflects the conscious of the social systems and that conscious favors Obama. Sorry its so hard for people like you to understand there still exists a society of free thinks, social responsible people who can make up their own mind and don't have to follow some corporate mandated "Conservative" agenda about the dollar being the be all - end all to all of civilizations problems.
        • lintmonkey, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Whoa, I think he was just referring to the fact that ejpusa said "by" two times by accident.
      • athenius22, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2While you're right that digg leans more towards Obama than McCain, ejpusa is right about the futures markets.

        As of this morning, Intrade shows a 30 point spread--and that's real money which is not just bounced around in the "echo chamber."
  • Ryan32, on 06/16/2008, -37/+12It's comedy gold how many morons on digg keep saying that Obama is a great leader after every speech.

    He hasn't led anything.... Anyone with a microphone could walk up and start talking *****, it doesn't mean they could lead anything...

    You know what Obama's greatest accomplishment has been? Convincing a bunch of stupid ass people that he's any different than any other politician.... And whats even better, he doesn't even deserve full credit for that..... because half the ***** he says he couldn't get away with if he wasn't black.
    • Maxo1128, on 06/16/2008, -5/+8Funny thing is, we'll all be laughing at you come November.
      • Ryan32, on 06/16/2008, -7/+4Why would you be laughing at me? Your the idiots that are going to feel stupid when he doesn't provide any answers to any of our countries problems.....

        All that will happen IF he is elected, is Americans will lose rights that the government should have no right to take... Obama supports a government that provides citizens with privileges, not rights. Privileges that can be stripped at any moment if the government deems it necessary..... Thats about as anti-American as it gets. The hell with his name, it's his voting record that proves he's anti-American.
        • josereyes0, on 06/16/2008, -1/+3I highly recommend that when you accuse others of being idiots you don't misspell words in the process.
    • Fordi, on 06/16/2008, -0/+6Hey, let's find a rock. I mean a big ass rock.
    • frodaddy, on 06/16/2008, -0/+7isn't that what makes a great leader...someone who can stand up in front of people and motivate them?

      ill-logic
      • josereyes0, on 06/16/2008, -0/+2That's part of what a great leader has to do, but there's much more to it. I still think, and have always thought since before Obama even decided to run for the presidency that he would be a great leader if elected.
    • ozroy, on 06/16/2008, -0/+10"Anyone with a microphone could walk up and start talking *****"

      Funny. McCain can't even do that.
    • beachian, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Is the Democratic Primary of no particular consequence to you?
    • ProUSADigger, on 06/16/2008, -2/+0Actually, I find it scary as hell and not comical at all that any human could be so easily fooled into believing
      the crap that so eloquently flows from the Obamessiah.

      It just proves, once again, how shallow the left truly is. JFK smiled nicely...he should be president!! RFK sounds just like JFK...he should be president! John Kerry literally hates America...he should be president!! Hillary has a vagina and has sucked THE GOLDEN *****...she should be President!! Obama is black, hates America, AND doesn't speak like Snoop Dog....he should be President!!

      Good goin' there, libs.
  • dlsspy, on 06/16/2008, -11/+42I support Obama, but I couldn't get into this speech. I was expecting something that was going to make me feel more empowered as one of the countless fathers who's had children taken away and is left with very little say as to what happens to them. Instead, I just heard what is little more than an insult.

    There may be a lot of single mothers out there, but you can be sure that many of them are *really* happy about the benefits they get from being in a country that encourages them to have a child and leave the father. My ex is having a baby with her third husband next month. That's ten more years of free money with no accountability.

    But I guess I'm still the bad guy.
    • charm803, on 06/16/2008, -3/+22You know, I'm sorry that this didn't help you out, but the truth is, you are probably in the minority of guys who fit this problem. He was referring to fathers who CHOOSE not to be a good father, so for you to take it as an insult is placing the blame on the wrong person. Why are you insulted if it doesn't fit you?

      If you try and try to be a good father, at the end, you can feel good about knowing that you gave it your best, and you can't control the actions of other people, in this case, your ex.

      Trust me when I say that your child eventually grows up, and sees the difference, even if your ex bad-mouths you, your child will see the difference between your actions and her words.
      • ZenMojo, on 06/16/2008, -1/+4He includes all single parents in his calculations. As a child of a "single-parent" household with a father in his life, I had to take exception to that point when I first heard the speech.
    • YukosEyes, on 06/16/2008, -8/+4I'm sorry about your situation. I have to say though that I doubt that anyone is "*really* happy" with money if the trade-off entails fragmented familial bonds. Are you really paying more money than is necessary for your child to live decently, more money than you would pay whether you were living with or away from your child? This, I admit, is rather forward, but do you pay more than half of the child's living expenses and contribute half of the child's daily care? Having a child is a very serious decision. I am married to a wonderful man, but still, I do everything in my power to avoid pregnancy until (or if) I am able to commit to such sacrifices. It doesn't seem like most people take it as seriously as I do. Hard to hear.
    • thailand1972, on 06/16/2008, -5/+10Well said. There is a *REAL* problem in the west in that fathers are not taken seriously by the law makers who are indoctrinated by the feminist belief system that women's needs always seem to co-incide with what's "in the best interests of the children" - this invariably means the father is booted out of the family, while maintaining his financial responsibility while losing his rights to actually see his kids and offer his own mental/moral support to them. The evidence is all around us, and broken homes are encouraged by feminists (while they will deny this) while they see women's needs as more important than the other members of the family's needs.
      • flashingcurser, on 06/16/2008, -0/+3I agree and to add to that, young men today need to be EXTREMELY careful who they make children with. If you feel "ready" be a father take a close look at who you're with, if she doesn't value fatherhood in her own life stay far away from her. She will not value it in her children's live.
    • TitoBob, on 06/16/2008, -0/+3Obama spoke about providing higher EITCs for fathers separated from their children who still take financial responsibility, but he also encouraged and challenged fathers to take more responsibility than that. That isn't to say that because your legal rights are infringed upon by your ex-wife/ex-girlfriend, that you aren't fulfilling your responsibility as a father. But you need to make the effort, to set the right example.

      Obama is trying to make the effort, to set the right example, even though there are (and will continue to be) challenges to prevent him from doing so. But he is stepping forward to that challenge, finding ways to use his current situation as a stepping stone -- not an excuse -- a stepping stone on a path that will help us all.

      Now I don't know your particular situation, and I won't tell you the impossible i