Obama opens 10 point lead.Follow

"Proverbially speaking, I want Obama to win so I can waive my **** in Gbaji's face for the next four years as the economy improves, war ends, and wages increase." --NaughtyWord

Don't count on it. Even if these things were to happen other things will occur that will eventually cause the public and press to turn on him like a pack of wild dogs. Just like they do to all presidents. That's just the nature of the beast.

Totem

I'd bet £100 that Odinga was added onto the picture with photoshop.

I went on that clinic's website last night, and they mentionned Obama coming in to do the test, but nowehere did they talk about Odinga being near. Seeing as the guy was running for President, you'd think they might mention it...

Also, I just wanna say getting a bolded "motherfUcking BAM" from Joph made me feel funny in the pants

Anyway, carry on.

Edit: I didn't link the picture last night because it's the only one on the whole web with both Obama and Odinga. Now, here coms the pro-tip: I went into "google images" typed in "obama odinga" and pressed... Enter! The very first picture to pop up was the one of Obama and Odinga standing in front of the Aids clinic.

Now, I do feel bad having let my super secret research technique out of the bag, but if it can help gbaji a little, even just a tiny little bit, then my work is done here.


Edited, Apr 4th 2008 9:16am by RedPhoenixxx

Well. When the NY Times writes a front page article about this, I'll let you know. Oh wait! That's what I'm talking about, isn't it?

Kind of a catch-22, isn't it? You're arguing that none of the claims about the connection between Obama and Odinga are true because no "legitimate" news source exists. But I'm arguing that it's those very legitimate news sources that are deliberately turning a blind eye to this. Just as they did with the Wright story until they were practically forced to.


Why isn't this being investigated by these so-called "legitimate" news agencies? Even if just to set the record straight?



So what? You seem to make a huge deal out of this. Like since he met with and spoke with the president of Kenya it makes the fact that he met with and spoke in support of an opposition candidate unimportant. Of course he met with the President. He pretty much had no choice, visiting US senator and all of that.

And the website that links to the opinion articles does have the full, non-cropped picture Joph. Again. You're making a big deal out of nothing. Who cares? The alleged facts of what Obama did and said in Kenya are significant, regardless of whether a photo was cropped, or whether he also met with the Kenyan President.

It's certainly significant enough to warrant some kind of journalistic investigation, right?



There are other news stories, but you have to dig for them.

Of course, that is a mainstream media piece. It certainly does not talk about Odinga's politics and background specificaly, but it certainly *does* support the allegation that Barack Obama spent a lot of time with Odinga and spoke on his behalf during his trip there.

Regardless of who you think is right or wrong here, or whether you agree that the Kenyan government is corrupt, I think we can (or should) all agree that clearly Obama supported Odinga's position and bashed the sitting government leaders during his trip there. Something that's pretty questionable for any US senator do to period, and doubly troubling when you realize the nature of the person he was lending his support to.


How many more bits and pieces of information do I have to provide Joph? I haven't found *any* source that refutes the claim that Obama was supporting Odinga while on that trip. Not one. As I said earlier, the absurdity is that this isn't a bigger story already. The facts are all in place. No one's refuting them. But no one's putting them together and putting them out on a mainstream media platform either...



/shrug

I just said it would be nice to have the transcripts. You know me. I *always* prefer to look at the entirety of a speech if I can.

But everyone I've found who's mentioned the speeches has categorized them at a minimum as "critical of the Kenyan government". And I have found multiple sources that mention that Obama was basically following Odinga around while on that trip. It's just not that hard to put 2 and 2 together here. I can't say if Obama meant to lend support and strength to Odinga's candidacy, or if he was just a stooge getting played by an opportunistic opposition candidate.

Either way though, it's relevant to his run for President here in the US, isn't it? Shouldn't we know that he did this and decide on our own whether we think this sort of behavior is something we want in a president?

Certainly, if any other candidate for president had done something even vaguely like this, it would have been plastered all over by now...



Yeah. And I suppose it was lack of evidence about Reverend Wright that kept that story off CNN for a year too!

Edited, Apr 4th 2008 4:34pm by gbaji

The guy has no cites, no sources and nothing to base his column on except for some shaky blogs. If this story WAS on the front of the NY Times about someone else, you'd be all over what a poorly written story it was.No, the fact that your sources keep neglecting to mention that Obama visited with both men is what I find significant.Not really. It supports that Kibaki was snippy about Obama's criticism of Kenya's government corruption. I linked to several sources of journalists who traveled with Obama and did not report on any extraordinary time spent with Odinga. Personally, I trust that more than a pissed off government spokesman looking to win points for his boss.

Edit: The story does mention Odinga "being at [Obama's] elbow" during Obama's trip to Nairobi. Which sounds a lot more like opportunism to be seen on Odinga's part than it sounds like active campaigning on Obama's. So far I have yet to see anyone who was there report that Obama was campaigning for or endorsing anyone. Saying that Odinga was at Obama's elbow seems like a prime time to mention that Obama has been campaigning for the guy.No, you still haven't really shown the "support" or "endorsements" or "rallies" or whatever. You're watering this down pretty damn thin.I haven't found a SINGLE source that refutes the claim that Obama is a dinosaur. How come the media isn't investigating this??As far as I'm concerned, we do know. It's up to you (generally speaking) to prove that there's a story here. You've done an exceptionally poor job of it so far.Now that's debating! Can I make up unprovable stuff too or is this something only you get to do?

Edited, Apr 4th 2008 7:43pm by Jophiel

*cough*

A potential presidential candidate himself, Odinga's been at Obama's elbow here fairly often and is a member of the Obama family's Luo tribe.

That was not a quote from the government spokesman, but a statement of fact in the article by the writer, Mike Flannery, who *was* one of the journalists who traveled with Obama on this trip.


So there you go Joph. A journalist who was there on the trip, who reported that Odinga and Obama were together "fairly often".


Want to try that one again?

Obama was campaigning for Odinga because their names both start with O!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok. I'll respond to this then.

You're correct that the phrase "campaigning for" is too specific, since we don't actually have any quotes of Obama saying something like "I support Odinga for President", or "Vote Odinga!", etc...

However, his actions very clearly benefited Odinga's campaign. Obama is wildly popular in Kenya. By having Odinga be at Obama's side while Obama wanders around the country, it strengthens Odinga's position politically. When Obama then gives speeches critical of the current government (whether legitimate or not), it only strengthens the perception even more.


If George Bush wandered around some country with an opposition candidate in tow, and gave speeches critical of the current government leader's policies and actions, wouldn't you kinda think he was propping up this opposition candidate? I think any sane person would come to that conclusion, and certainly the people of Kenya would not miss that connection.


You're correct that it's quite possible that this was just something Odinga did to take advantage of Obama for his own political ends. But that doesn't make the situation better for Obama (ok, not much better!). Because this tells us that Obama was oblivious to the fact that he was being used by a politician during his trip. He blundered into giving a radical opposition leader greater political power then he would have had otherwise, with the result being riots, upwards of a thousand people dead, and significant damage to the Kenyan political system.


That's significant as well IMO. It's certainly relevant to the decision US voters need to make with regards to Obama's qualifications to be President. If he didn't actively support Odinga's campaign, then he certainly appears to have been easily manipulated by Odinga. And if he did that much damage just as a US senator, can you imaging the damage he could do making similar blunders as President?


It's a relevant story no matter which angle you take on it. We can quibble over this detail or that, but the very fact that we have to debate the details and what they mean is one of the best reasons why this is a story that needs to be told. We disagree on the significance of his actions and decisions with regard to the resulting crisis that occurred in Kenya. However, I think we can agree on the following facts:

1. Obama did travel to Kenya.
2. He did spend a significant amount of time with Odinga (or Odinga spent significant time with him).
3. He did speak in Nairobi and made comments critical of the current goverment.
4. According to the article at least, this was something "he's done almost every day since arriving".
5. His criticisms drew negative responses from the Kenyan government
6. All of this benefited Odinga's political campaign.


The degree to which Obama intended number 6 to happen really doesn't matter. His actions clearly *did* help Odinga's political fortunes. This is a relevant story, if for no other reason then it addresses Obama's potential capability in the area of foreign policy.


I'm just not sure how anyone can argue that this isn't worth of being a major story. It's directly relevant to Obama's qualifications for the office he's running for.

How could you not? I'm a comedic genius.

Nexa

Thank you. I'm not really concerned with your bit about "But if this guy..." etc. Incidentally, Odinga was only with Obama while he was in Nairobi, not while he was "wandering the country".It makes the story much different than your blogs imply.

1. Obama did travel to Kenya.
Yes

2. He did spend a significant amount of time with Odinga (or Odinga spent significant time with him).
Inconclusive. Obama spent three days in Nairobi, one of which was really a day trip to see his grandmother. I'd want a better definition of "fairly often". The other two on-the-scene accounts don't take note of it, after all. I can easily accept a difference in perspective but that's a slimmer margin than thinking that Odinga clung to Obama like a lamprey.

3. He did speak in Nairobi and made comments critical of the current goverment.
True. But he did that before and after Nairobi and also criticized the South African government for its failure to act to the AIDS crisis and criticized Chad's government for expelling oil companies. He didn't focus his criticisms on Kenya or Nairobi.

4. According to the article at least, this was something "he's done almost every day since arriving".
Seems that way. Although he was doing so before and after Nairobi and it was further exasperated by the bribe/fee extracted by the CBS crew following him.

5. His criticisms drew negative responses from the Kenyan government
Not entirely surprising, but yes.

6. All of this benefited Odinga's political campaign.
To what extent? And I certainly wouldn't consider this line of evidence the be proof of "support" for Odinga. If I was being generous I might say Odinga benefited from the message that the government is rife with corruption but that's a far cry from Obama supporting Odinga.

I'm sorry, I don't see much of a story here. What story there is here is leagues different from how you initally presented it. You've gone from "Obama was endorsing this guy and supported his run for office" to "Well, he spent some time with him and he should have known it'd help him."

That is largely due to your inability to comprehend what you are reading.


Listen dumbfuck, here is the idea behind a useful debate. For as much as I dislike the Bush administration, I could not sit here and compare Bush to Hitler. Bush might be a dumbfuck, washed up, redneck, bible-thumping, driveling moron, but I wouldn't dare compare him to Hitler.


Human history might see another Hitler, but the chances are slim. Obama, Bush, Hillary, Lora Croft, or Obi-wan Kenobi hardly qualify. Obama doesn't propragate segregation, elimination, and/or destruction of whole societies, he isn't a monster of propaganda, he isn't a white German, and he isn't a fascist. These three things eliminate any hope of him being compared to Hitler. God damn it, I feel more retarded having to explain this to your dumb ***.

Seriously, if you cannot see why comparing any modern political figure in the US as a monumentally retarded idea then you need to die of self-induced asphyxiation.

I don't call it much of anything. You're trying to phrase it as though the speeches and Odinga were related. There's nothing suggesting that they were and, in my opinion, the fact that Obama gave many speeches critical of several governments and was critical of government corruption in Kenya before arriving in Nairobi would suggest that the two weren't related.Huh? He's a politican who was running for office. One would assume anyone trying to be president of some (US friendly) developing nation would want to be favorably seen with a US senator. Obama also met with Kibaki. Does that mean he was supporting Kibaki? He was making the rounds with the notable politicans in the nation. It doesn't mean he was supporting any of them.

You're grabbing at thin straws here and your argument for scandal gets weaker every time. You've gone fromto saying that since Obama didn't chase Odinga off with a broom and refuse to be seen with the potential next president of Kenya, that means Obama was really supporting him. I understand that you need to save face here but doesn't it bother you that you were so obviously wrong in the quoted statement?

Edited, Apr 4th 2008 11:44pm by Jophiel

You're grabbing at thin straws here and your argument for scandal gets weaker every time.

Joph. The argument is that Obama is black and you'll lose your job to a formerly homeless guy named Leroy from Gary, Indiana if he's elected.

Obama said so in a speech to the bubble gum fairy guild in marshmallow fluff sillytown just a week ago. How can you be so blind to this? I mean I know you're drinking the Obama grape drink, but this is too much.