Subscribe to this blog's feedGravitas. Wikipedia defines it as the sense of dignity, seriousness, and duty that is one of the several virtues that ancient Roman society expected men to possess, along with pietas and dignitas.
The Wiki entry goes on to explain that Gravitas should not be confused with "gravity" in the sense of importance.
It also reminds us that "Gravitas" was frequently used by news media outlets during the 2000 United States Presidential race to describe the addition of Dick Cheney to the George W. Bush. campaign. Cheney, an experienced politician and member of President George H. W. Bush's cabinet, according to many media outlets, added "gravitas" to the campaign. What that got us is, well, history. We’ve now been through six and a half years of what has arguably been the worst administration in U.S. history.
Despite what we’ve all experienced together since the Redpublicans stole the election in 2000, this month’s rap on Barack Obama is that he lacks the Gravitas to win the November election. The Reds - who believe that Obama would be tougher to beat than Hillary - are also heating up the old “he’s an elitist” rhetoric that Spiro Agnew used to bludgeon us blind with back in the 1970's. Both of those tags are meritless. I see in Obama a man who has the ability to lead us, and while Barack may be different from many of us in troubling ways, he is by far the best of the three candidates, in my opinion. McCain - whose humorous put-down of the Woodstock generation revealed his own elitism - is out of the question. McCain will keep walking us down the same path to economic and cultural marginalization that we all been have walking with Mr. Bush and his friends. If Barack isn’t a perfect human being, I’ll take his flaws over those of Hillary and John. It’s about time we stopped paying attention to the pins on our lapels and the labels we pin on others, and paid attention to the truth. That’s the only Gravitas I’m interested in.
Comments (4)
The truth is we dont have a good candidate for President. Barrack has less experience than a guy all Dems said didnt have enough, Quayle. Yes, Barrack is a great speaker,unless you want facts and substance. I am always amazed how Dems and Libs fall in love with great speakers who have absolutely no content. I guess that might explain a lot of their hatred of Bush. I dislike Bush for different reason than you,reason you would love a Dem for doing the same thing. He has spent more on social programs than any President in US history. He did cut taxes,though not enough, but he didnt cut spending. That is the definition of compassionate conservatism. I have no idea what he means by change. I have seen several interviews with him and it is obvious he understands less about economics than both Hillary and McCain and that is insane.
Its difficult to know how different a Bush admin would have been had there been no 911. Would he have cut spending? I dont think so. His dad was a big spending liberal and the son hasnt fallen far from the tree.
Back to Barrack, he has no idea what capital gains are or how our economy works. Just listen to his interview with the very liberal Maria Bartimo. He makes Bush sound like Buffet or Einstein. It also humorous that his campaign has shown many Americans that the Dem party is the real home of racism. In truth neither Hillary or Barrack has a rats chance of winning. I didnt think Dems could come up with more horrible and out of touch candidates than Al Gore and Lurch, but they have. The only chance they have at winning is the same thing that put Clinton into his first term, a third party candidate. If Hillary wins the nomination look for Clintons to find another "Perot". If Barrack wins it will be a slaughter, and not because he is black, race has nothing to do with it. The guy has no idea what he is talking about. Listen to him. A real shame and waste of money. Change? Change to what? At some point you have to explain what the change is and he cant seem to answer that one.
Wasnt it funny to see five Dems come out demanding Saudis produce more oil today, when they support no drilling on US land anywhere? They fight every refinery or nuke on US land. They support burning our food in our cars, causing a worldwide food panic and inflation? Hilarious!
Just wondering why Hillary didnt get the same treatment Newt did when he wrote his book?
Also wondering why Willy didnt get the same treatment Reagan did for making 2mill on two speeches to Japan and Willy has made 100mill. I have no problem with either,just wondering why only the republican got hammered.
Posted by jack | April 24, 2008 3:46 PM
Posted on April 24, 2008 15:46
Good blog David ! In response to "Jack", I would just like to quote Senator Bernie Sanders, Independent Senator(Vermont), from a past episode of Colbert Report. "Either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, on their worst day, will be a better president than George W. Bush has been on his best day"
Keep up with the blogs David ! I enjoy reading them...Ray
Posted by J.R.E. | April 25, 2008 3:24 AM
Posted on April 25, 2008 03:24
You have to admit the 5 dems who came out last friday telling Saudis they need to increase production and Pelosi wanting to investigate oil companies for gas price either has to be a product of utter ignorance or corruption. No 6 people have done more to increase the price of oil,gas,and gasoline than these six prostitutes. They have stood in the way of every attempt to drill on US lands or water, they have put up roadblocks to new refineries and nukes, they have supported tax breaks throughout the 90s for people buying SUVs,they have supported the corn to ethanol debacle, the clusterfuck of all clusterfucks, in return for political doantions and mid west votes. This has transfered the inflation in energy directly into our food supply. Idiocy.
Dont get me wrong I am not saying Bush is the answer, he appears to be a fool, but Obama and Hillary appear to be worse. Bush should be cutting US domestic spending to strengthen the dollar, at least $50 of oil price is our worthless currency,which Greenspand started to inflate in mid 90s to offset Clinton tax increases,Honk Kong debacle,and LTC collapse. He should be beating Congress and Dems over the head with the blame for oil price increase because they are the main reason we have no supply. Oil and gas are plentiful,but we must have permission to find it and drill it and refine it. Our own government is entirely responsible for this mess.
Why hasnt Bush attacked Iran yet? That should have been done two years ago. At least $30 of oil price is geopolitical fears and the runt in Iran and drug addict in South America need to be gone if we are to get rid of that premium.
Obama is for change, who isnt? I have never seen two less qualifed people running for President since W ran. It is fun watching them destroy each other. This is the best entertainment going since Bill turned the white house into a whore house
Posted by jack | April 28, 2008 12:23 PM
Posted on April 28, 2008 12:23
This comment only for the blog owner i just want to thanks this guy. becoz of i get lots of information form it.
Posted by penis enlargement | June 20, 2008 12:33 PM
Posted on June 20, 2008 12:33