The trouble with Obama in 2008 is exactly what you are saying, he is a cypher. He is campaigning on words alone. He uses soaring rhetoric in his speeches that stir and inspire the soul, but when you look closely, it is all air. There is little to no substance. THAT is what is most disconcerting to me, not his musings from 1996.

I saw someone make the point that no matter how much the chattering classes have proclaimed his “speech”, in spite of comparison to MLK’s “I have a dream”, JFK’s “Ask not”, and even (gag me with a hot poker) Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address; in spite of all this praise and adoration, when people are asked to repeat one line, just one from it, they have a hard time doing it.

It is all air, nothing but air. That, and callously throwing his grandmother — the woman who raised him — under the bus for political expediency are major red flags.

The last person who ran for President in a similar manner was Jimmy Carter. How well I remember his 1976 artful dodging of specific issues. His was the “feel good” campaign. And for a nation emerging from the Watergate nightmare, it was truly soothing to their ears. And the result? Only the worst administration of the 20th Century. We are still cleaning up his messes.

That is what troubles me about Barak Obama.

My apologies.

I would agree to a point. I found the way Governor Romney dealt with his past rather refreshing. Own up to it, be honest and frank, and move on.

Unfortunately what many see as a true sign of intelligence (the ability to rethink an issue as one matures), others see as heresy. Not many of us have the luxury of being right from the get go, all the time, and never having to backtrack or modify our thinking.

What strikes me here, though, is unlike Governor Romney’s well-considered but unpopular (by liberal Massachusetts standards) shift on abortion for moral reasons, I find Obama’s “conversion” more political expediency than core belief. Since he hasn’t been on the national scene very long, hasn’t actually accomplished much while there (how many times did he vote “present” in IL?), we still don’t know what he truly believes today. He’s a cypher, and since we have nothing else to judge him by, we have to look to the paltry body of past evidence in a very short paper trail. The good news is that task is much easier by the manageable nature of his sparse record.

So though I tend to agree with your argument in Governor Romney’s case, as he has been clearly in the public eye for some time and is well vetted, in Obama’s case, due to his utter lack of public record or accomplishment, the same may not apply.

Again my apologies.

In 1992, many people got upset about the fact Clinton dodged the draft and smoked marijuana back in the sixties. That truly did not bother me. It was 25 years in the past — all water under the bridge. What did trouble me was the way that the 1992 Clinton tried to explain them. He changed his draft story at least three times, and then there was his famous “But I didn’t inhale” line. The weaselly way he reacted warned me that we were in for a rough ride if he were elected. I wasn’t wrong, was I?

Obama was a young idiot back in 1996. That was twelve years ago. What is he now? Has he espoused the same views recently? How recently?

What is the difference between us holding his 1996 views against him, and Clinton’s holding his kindergarten essay against him? Where would YOU draw the line?

Long time no hear. Glad to see your still trolling other’s blogs. Too bad your expansive open mindedness didn’t extend to Governor Romney when he was in the race.

I practice a ten-year statute of limitations on stupidity. If an act of stupidity occurred more than ten years ago, it is water under the bridge in my book.

Now if you have anything more current, then let’s see it. Otherwise, it is time to move on.