What are Barack Obama's Books About?

[Gokul43201]

Why would Obama lead with this...shouldn't he wait a week or two?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/15/obama-end-militarys-dont-ask-dont-tell-policy/

Who said he wishes to "lead" with it? Nobody in the link you provided, as far as I can tell.

 

[Astronuc]

Interesting juxtaposition of MLK Day and Obama's inauguration. As president, Obama will have (obviously) command to affect the course of the US economy and international diplomacy:

America: What in the world does it want to be?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090118/ap_on_re_us/measure_of_a_nation_the_world_at_home

NEW YORK – George Washington, first president, said this: "It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world."

Eldridge Cleaver, civil rights leader, said this: "Americans think of themselves collectively as a huge rescue squad on 24-hour call."

Toby Keith, populist country singer, said this: "This big dog will fight when you rattle his cage — and you'll be sorry that you messed with the U.S. of A."

Now: Place those three divergent sentiments in a large bowl. Whip vigorously until blended. There you'll have, in one curious, often contradictory recipe, the world-changing, world-shaking world view of the quixotic species known as the American people.

When 21st-century Americans contemplate their place on the planet, they confront a complex history of isolationism and engagement, a deep instinct to live and let live that coexists with an equally fervent desire to be a robust beacon of freedom — sometimes by any means necessary.

. . . .

MLK's dream also included economic justice
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090118/ap_on_re_us/mlk_economic_equality

NEW YORK – The focus of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964 wasn't what had been accomplished — but rather his view of what still needed to be done.

More than four decades later, King scholars say he would take the same approach at this historic moment — the inauguration of the first black president at a time when the nation is facing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression.

The crisis could widen the already large financial gaps between whites and blacks and make it more difficult to attain King's dream of economic equality in America.

"I believe that Dr. King would caution us not to rest on the election of a black president and say our work here is done," said Kendra King, associate professor of politics at Oglethorpe University in Atlanta.

Although King is best known for his civil rights work, he was a staunch advocate for economic justice. In the months before he was killed, he had been working on the Poor People's Campaign and calling for an economic bill of rights. When he was assassinated in 1968, he was in Memphis supporting a sanitation workers' strike.

"Economic empowerment and justice was always a part of Dr. King's purpose," professor King said. "Civil rights without economic parity is still imprisonment."

. . . .

 

[WhoWee]

Obama has gotten himself elected...that is a fact.

There will be a BIG celebration...rightfully so...big social breakthrough.

The campaign is over...Obama has the "football"...and the economy...and our trust.

I wish him well...I hope he's up to the task.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

here's a cut paste of something I posted elsewhere...

I picked up Obama's book The Audacity of Hope yesterday and thought I would share my impression of it so far.

I have to admit that as much as I liked Obama and hoped he would win I didnt know a whole lot about him except what I read in articles and heard from my mostly conservative local radio talk show hosts. As I read this book I was fairly suprised at the degree to which I agree with him, at least in principle if not in every opinion. I'm not used to the idea of liking and agreeing with a politician so much.

The book is written in a conversational manner and is rather accessable. Obama points out himself that the book is not meant to reveal his manifesto or lay out some plan of action but only to highlight what he sees as the major problems in American politics today through the lens of his own experience. The issue that he seems to focus on most is the extreme partisan infighting.

Obama admits to being possessed of a bias in political philosophy but proceeds from there to show a rather balanced perception of his colleagues and his constituents. He says that although he may not agree with some one philosophically that does not mean they don't have good points to make, good ideas to share, and legitimate concerns about the effects of government on their freedoms and way of life. He says that he would love to see a day again when republicans and democrats have a mutual respect and aim to work together instead of seeking to undermine one another.

Perhaps its just a lot of rhetoric but I personally found it to be rather sincere. I think its quite a good book to read for anyone who wants to know more about how our new president thinks and I doubt many people will find they can't agree with him at least on the principles of his political philosophy.

 

[Gokul43201]

Obama's political philosophy: The unions put you into office, return the favor.

Obama seems to be having a little trouble keeping track of what his political philosophy is supposed to be.

Union leaders were taken aback this month when Obama, during television appearances discussing the stimulus legislation, spoke skeptically of "Buy American" provisions in the bill giving U.S. makers of steel and other materials an advantage in bidding for contracts.

Obama told Fox News that the U.S. "can't send a protectionist message," and he cautioned on ABC News that the requirements could be a "potential source of trade wars that we can't afford at a time when trade is sinking all across the globe."

That language mirrored the criticisms that business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had used in arguing against "Buy American" rules.

Business groups were thrilled at Obama's words.

"That was an extremely important moment," said John Murphy, vice president for international affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, one of the biggest business associations. "The business community is very pleased that the White House stepped in and showed leadership on this issue."

"Buy American" rules remain in the stimulus bill that the president is scheduled to sign Tuesday, but labor advocates were alarmed by Obama's willingness to insert himself in the debate as a champion of business concerns. They said his stance was far different than during the presidential election, when Obama was trying to win union votes and called for rebuilding America with union-made materials.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-obama-anxiety16-2009feb16,0,1836201.story

 

[WhoWee]

He also said there isn't any "pork" in the stimulus bill.

 

[Gokul43201]

He also said there isn't any "pork" in the stimulus bill.

Why is that relevant to the philosophy outlined above?

Also, I believe he said there were no earmarks. And this was probably close to true of the House version (the senate hadn't yet passed their version, when Obama made that statement a couple weeks ago, and it was almost entirely the Senate that put any earmarks in). I don't recall if Futuregen was in the House version, but that's definitely an earmark. But by the standards of the typical spending bill passed anytime over the last 8 years, I'd venture that this one has at least an order of magnitude smaller cut of the bill as earmarks.

 

[WhoWee]

What do you call Harry Reid's railroad and Nancy Pelosi's marsh protection?

Even though he's a lawyer, accustomed to speaking this way, he shouldn't make remarks that are "technically correct" but mislead in spirit.

 

[OmCheeto]

Obama seems to be having a little trouble keeping track of what his political philosophy is supposed to be.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-obama-anxiety16-2009feb16,0,1836201.story

Obama told Fox News that the U.S. "can't send a protectionist message," and he cautioned on ABC News that the requirements could be a "potential source of trade wars that we can't afford at a time when trade is sinking all across the globe."

Perhaps he's just a reflection of America itself:

http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html"
Jan 2009

Auto
Domestic 88,000
Import 228,000

Truck
Domestic 192,000
Import 149,000

If I've said it once, I've said it three times; Politicians will say and do whatever they have to, to get elected.

And it seems a bit hypocritical to bad mouth Obama for not touting "Buy American" when Americans aren't buying American.

Btw, are those tax breaks for big trucks still in place? Might be something Obama could fix real quick. I know several guys who drive monster trucks to work everyday because their wives do nails for a living.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2002-12-18-suv-tax-break_x.htm"
12/18/2002

Suppose a business owner wants to purchase a $45,000 luxury SUV for use in his business. He could write off $24,000 of the cost under section 179 of the tax code as accelerated depreciation. Then the buyer could write off additional depreciation of the remaining $21,000 under a five-year schedule — 20%, or $4,200, in the first year.

That's a total $28,200 tax write-off in the first year.

Let's see, 100 miles/week * 50 weeks/year @ 15 mpg @ $2/gal = $666.66 / year

hmmm...

That comes out to 42 years worth of free gas.
or 21 years @ $4/gal.

Does anyone know where I can get a business license?

 

[Gokul43201]

WhoWee: I still don't understand if this is meant to be related to the union philosophy, and how.

What do you call Harry Reid's railroad and Nancy Pelosi's marsh protection?

I don't know the specific details about either of them, but anything that Reid's name was attached to was passed only after Obama made the statement that I think you are referring to. And as for Pelosi's marsh protection ... that wasn't proposed by Pelosi, or anyone in the House for that matter. It was the Senate that appropriated money for Cali wetlands. The Senate also appropriated money for Central Utah. Would you call that Orrin Hatch's earmark, or earmarks of the mostly Republican Utah House delegation?

Even though he's a lawyer, accustomed to speaking this way, he shouldn't make remarks that are "technically correct" but mislead in spirit.

I think if you want to get to the spirit of it, you will find that the House version was indeed extremely and, probably unprecedentedly (among the last decade or two) low in things that are not technically earmarks but might be called so. I think that should count as a positive thing.

PS: Futuregen was put in by the Senate, and I think it was stripped out later.

 

[WhoWee]

This thread is about understanding Obama. He said there is no pork in this bill. He's also said no earmarks. The majority of people take him at his word.

I agree, he didn't write the bill and Harry's railroad was snuck in after the comments.

Perhaps he should veto the Bill and keep his word?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Perhaps he should veto the Bill and keep his word?

There may not be time. Apparently the latest numbers indicate that the economy is still in free-fall.

 

[Gokul43201]

This thread is about understanding Obama.

Okay, so it's generally about Obama. When you wrote "he also said ..." I thought you were implying a connection between these statements and those.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

...Jon Summers, a spokesman for Reid, said the $8 billion is for competitive high-speed rail grants and that all states would have to apply for the funding. He said the maglev is just one project that would be eligible.

He also said Reid supported the funding increase because high-speed rail is a priority of President Obama. In a speech Feb. 10 in Florida, Obama said he wanted to see more "high-speed rail where it can be constructed."...

http://www.masstransitmag.com/online/article.jsp?siteSection=3&id=7968

Ultimately the Sec of Transportation will decide where the money goes, so I don't think this qualifies as pork as it may not serve Reid's constituency. Also, an LA to Vegas run may be be a logical beginning for a national HS rail system. Vegas has been one of the fastest growing areas of the country.

Any project dedicated to infrastructure might be considered someone's pork, but we do need infrastructure. And we are way behind many European and some Asian countries in terms of rail transportation.

 

[WhoWee]

Okay, so it's generally about Obama. When you wrote "he also said ..." I thought you were implying a connection between these statements and those.

Fair enough...your comment

"Obama seems to be having a little trouble keeping track of what his political philosophy is supposed to be."

Is really what I responded to...but in the context of the thread..."Understanding Barack Obama".

Much earlier in this thread, I commented that we need to hold Obama to the same standard as Bush Sr. with his "read my lips" comment...I don't expect to have to read between the lines with the Commander in Chief...say what you mean and do what you say...no pork means no pork, no lobbyists means no lobbyists and no earmarks means no earmarks.

However, I'm really not sure what "save or create 3.5 million jobs" really means. It's starting to look like he meant save state jobs...we'll see.

 

[WhoWee]

http://www.masstransitmag.com/online/article.jsp?siteSection=3&id=7968

Ultimately the Sec of Transportation will decide where the money goes, so I don't think this qualifies as pork as it may not serve Reid's constituency. Also, an LA to Vegas run may be be a logical beginning for a national HS rail system.

Ok, I get it...this isn't Harry's train...it's "Barry's" train...LOL!

 

[OmCheeto]

There may not be time. Apparently the latest numbers indicate that the economy is still in free-fall.

Well, at least we're not alone:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/15/japanese-economy-in-free-fall/"
Tokyo's GDP faces steepest drop since '74
David M. Dickson (Contact)
Sunday, February 15, 2009

Wednesday, 26 September, 2001, 13:37 GMT 14:37 UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1564612.stm"

Oh wait. That's us. Only it was 8 years ago.

Weeeee! We're doing it again.

Let's see who else is on the roller coaster.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/23/business/23markets-414378.php"
By Matthew Saltmarsh
Published: January 23, 2009

Gads. This will take forever looking at each country.

Lets try by region.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25053226-36418,00.html"
Nicholas Winning | February 14, 2009

Hmmm... How about Asia?
Japan's tanking.

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=22661&prog=zch"
Albert Keidel
January 22, 2009

On January 22, China released a draft of economic statistics on its economy for the year 2008. At the same time it released GDP growth data for individual quarters that showed it falling to 6.8 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008, down from 9.0 percent in the previous quarter and 13 percent for all of 2007.

Question: Is China’s economy in free fall?

hmmm... Their economy is still growing but someone is asking if their economy is in freefall?
Ah hahahaha!

Bah! Who can trust what comes out of China.
Stinkin' lyin' media controlling commie reds...
I bet you by this time next year they'll be beggin' for winter wheat.

...

Anyways. I don't know what this has to do with Obama.

But maybe this is why he will now do anything to keep the world from tanking.

Even if it means breaking a few promises.

Godspeed Barack. Godspeed.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Senators Graham [R] and King [R] were on ABC's This Week yesterday complaining that there's not enough money for infrastructure.
http://abcnews.go.com/thisweek

 

[WhoWee]

Anyways. I don't know what this has to do with Obama.

But maybe this is why he will now do anything to keep the world from tanking.

Even if it means breaking a few promises.

Godspeed Barack. Godspeed.

How many is a few broken promises...one a year, a month, a week, a day?

Are we changing the rules for him...different standard in difficult times?

He needs to be MORE accountable...that was his platform.

I don't want to hear that Mr. Geithner doesn't have any details after the President (the day before) said he'll explain in full and give all the details of the new plan.

This is no time to shoot from the hip and see what sticks...especially after Biden said there's a 30% chance (something they're planning) won't work.

This stimulus plan had to be voted on before anyone even read it NO TIME TO WASTE...fear tactics and broken promises are not confidence builders...and that's what we need right now more than anything...CONFIDENCE in our leaders and trust in what the say.

 

[mheslep]

http://www.masstransitmag.com/online/article.jsp?siteSection=3&id=7968

Ultimately the Sec of Transportation will decide where the money goes, so I don't think this qualifies as pork as it may not serve Reid's constituency. Also, an LA to Vegas run may be be a logical beginning for a national HS rail system. Vegas has been one of the fastest growing areas of the country.

Any project dedicated to infrastructure might be considered someone's pork, but we do need infrastructure. And we are way behind many European and some Asian countries in terms of rail transportation.

I think HS rail is great based on its cool factor if not its economics. Last I looked it is not very cost effective compared to alternatives for various reasons, for one thing US geography is dwarfs the EU and Japan. On the other hand the government has already subsidized the roads that compete with HS, nor is there a cost attached to additional car pollution. (Another reason for a gas tax). Perhaps a loss-leader kick start of HS rail will bring costs down.

Regards special interests, the rail has to go somewhere, somebody's state has to benefit. Also I don't know how the term earmarks apply to this spendulous bill. AFAIK earmarks are traditionally attached by individual Members after bills are written and pass committees; this bill didn't go through any committees. So either the entire thing is a giant earmark or none of it is.

My main criticism for Harry's rail is: it won't stimulate anything in this recession, it will take way too long! There's no way a maglev train is shovel ready. Again: this should have been ripped out per Rivlin, debated and properly have been put in an energy or transit bill. Its a LIE to put it this bill and say it will employ the unemployed.

 

[Skyhunter]

Geithner outlined the strategies.

The tactics will evolve.

And if the members of Congress did not take the time to read the bill during the last three months while it was being written and debated... well then is that not more a reflection on them than it is the President?

 

[OmCheeto]

How many is a few broken promises...one a year, a month, a week, a day?

Are we changing the rules for him...different standard in difficult times?

He needs to be MORE accountable...that was his platform.

I don't want to hear that Mr. Geithner doesn't have any details after the President (the day before) said he'll explain in full and give all the details of the new plan.

This is no time to shoot from the hip and see what sticks...especially after Biden said there's a 30% chance (something they're planning) won't work.

This stimulus plan had to be voted on before anyone even read it NO TIME TO WASTE...fear tactics and broken promises are not confidence builders...and that's what we need right now more than anything...CONFIDENCE in our leaders and trust in what the say.

Nixon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZmjMa2hLXpc&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZmjMa2hLXpc&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Reagan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eHXq8TRejow&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eHXq8TRejow&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

George H.W. Bush
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/E5DZBFbMdjI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/E5DZBFbMdjI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Clinton
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KiIP_KDQmXs&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KiIP_KDQmXs&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

W
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Slmr024JYaA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Slmr024JYaA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

And just to be fair and balanced:

Barack
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EY5CQnOn75c&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EY5CQnOn75c&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

If I have said it once, I have said it 4 times; "Politicians will do and say what they have to, to get elected"

Barack, in spite of what Rush and his peers have stated, is not the messiah.

If McCain had been elected, I'd be cheering him on right now, in spite of what he may have said during his campaign.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GEtZlR3zp4c&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GEtZlR3zp4c&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

My apologies to everyone, if any of these are fabricated.
And my apologies for leaving out President Carter. I could not find any clips from before or during his presidency which indicated he was a typical president.

 

[WhoWee]

In spite of being our most intekkigent President, Carter was probably too honest...he gave us too many details...he looked weak (especially during hostage crisis)...remember the flip charts? Aside from 3 mile...we didn't listen to Carter...nobody wanted to hear about drive 55 and lower the thermostat, etc.

Reagan came in and said don't worry about it...I'll take care of this...everything is fine...then he spent the Soviets into collapse.

 

[OmCheeto]

http://www.military.com/veterans-report/president-reviewing-coffin-photos-ban?ESRC=vr.nl

Week of February 16, 2009
President Obama said Monday he is considering whether to overturn a Pentagon policy that bans the media from taking pictures of the flag-draped coffins of U.S. troops returning from the battlefield. A leading military families group says the policy, enforced without exception during the administration of former President George W. Bush, should let survivors of the dead decide whether photographers can record their return. To learn more, http://www.military.com/news/article/president-reviewing-coffin-photos-ban.html" on Military.com.

I believe in the early part of the primary's I stated that I was glad that a chronological peer might be going into office.

I wonder if Barack sat in front of a TV, as a 10 year old, watched the body count like I did, and think to himself; "Man, that's stupid".

 

[WhoWee]

I believe in the early part of the primary's I stated that I was glad that a chronological peer might be going into office.

I wonder if Barack sat in front of a TV, as a 10 year old, watched the body count like I did, and think to himself; "Man, that's stupid".

It's a slippery slope...flag draped coffins are one issue...body bags another...we need to respect the dead and their families.

He needs to be clear.

 

[OmCheeto]

It's a slippery slope...flag draped coffins are one issue...body bags another...we need to respect the dead and their families.

He needs to be clear.

Yes. I thought about this a bit more and decided it would just open up a pandora's box of paparazzi and media buttheads trying to get a good clear shot of tears and asking stupid questions like, "how do you feel?", etc, etc.

But getting back to understanding Barack, I ran across a brief article about him:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2007/12/13/ST2007121301893.html"

By Kevin Merida
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 14, 2007; Page A12

This undated photo released by Obama for America shows Barack Obama and his father, also named Barack Obama. Obama's father left the family to study at Harvard when Barack was just two, returning only once. Obama wrote poignantly about this visit in his memoir, remembering the basketball his father gave him, the African records they danced to, the Dave Brubeck concert they attended. Obama, then 10, never saw his father again.

 

[WhoWee]

Can anyone explain this yet?

 

[Scuzzle]

I've thought about that, and after listening to all of the talking heads and radio personalities, I've decided that he isn't calling for a literal civilian military. It's likely that his idea of a "civilian security force" is an organization, or group of organizations, who are given the task of communicating the Democrat values and principles (or, more importantly, his values and principles) to America. He'll count on millions of volunteers to wage a constant, yet passive, advertising campaign for his agenda. Think "Obama's Witnesses".

 

[WhoWee]

I've thought about that, and after listening to all of the talking heads and radio personalities, I've decided that he isn't calling for a literal civilian military. It's likely that his idea of a "civilian security force" is an organization, or group of organizations, who are given the task of communicating the Democrat values and principles (or, more importantly, his values and principles) to America. He'll count on millions of volunteers to wage a constant, yet passive, advertising campaign for his agenda. Think "Obama's Witnesses".

Like ACORN?

 

[WhoWee]

I've thought about that, and after listening to all of the talking heads and radio personalities, I've decided that he isn't calling for a literal civilian military. It's likely that his idea of a "civilian security force" is an organization, or group of organizations, who are given the task of communicating the Democrat values and principles (or, more importantly, his values and principles) to America. He'll count on millions of volunteers to wage a constant, yet passive, advertising campaign for his agenda. Think "Obama's Witnesses".

Those are not his words:

 

[Art]

Here is a link to his whole speech on 'service'. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Df2p6867_pw&NR=1

He is talking about people volunteering for non-profit charities with greater financial support from the gov't. He gives an example of a Harlem group *Harlem Children's Zone" who help and mentor children from deprived backgrounds.

His stated goal is to have more people involved in their communities to improve their environment. For example by having students help weatherise homes it not only helps the less well off but also helps with America's security as it reduces dependence on foreign oil. By having community groups tackle the reasons behind gang violence it also helps with security both directly though less violence and indirectly through freeing up police resources.

Tellingly, some people here seem to have automatically equated service and security with some form of military service and military goals which is not the sense in which he was using the term and highlights perhaps why this speech needed to be made. There are many more ways to serve one's country than donning a uniform and carrying a gun. Any notion he was calling for a 'civilian military' or a Democratic fifth column is not only utter nonsense but is the complete opposite of the message he was communicatimg as is plainly obvious when one listens to the whole speech, though given the selective nature of the section of his speech quoted one can see why it could be open to misinterpretation to the gullible which was no doubt the intention of whoever posted it on YouTube.

 

[BoomBoom]

Can anyone explain this yet?

It is amusing how they can take a little clip and completely disregard the context of what he was actually talking about and clip the words just so it sounds like he is discussing something else...specifically to distort the message.

In another clip (of the same speech) that included just a few words before your clip started, the true message is clear. Those words were: "by 2011, to renew our diplomacy.". He is obviously talking of diplomatic efforts.

Simply ridiculous...


EDIT: I just noticed Art posted the whole speech as I was typing. (listening now) Thanks, for that...hopefully it will clear up things for the conspiracy theory nuts.

 

[BoomBoom]

Indeed after listening to the speech, preceding the clip being mis-characterized he says: "we will double the size of our peace corps by 2011, to renew our diplomacy." ...ooooh scary!

Look for yourselves, it starts at about 16:35 in the speech that Art linked above.