Contact:
Go To:
Polls:
Other Notable Sites
The Top Ten Reasons Barack Obama Should Not Be President
...Are in fact all provided by quotes from the candidate himself.
1) - The system isn't working...when communities are terrorized by ICE immigration raids, when nursing mothers are torn from their babies, when children come home from school to find their parents missing, WHEN PEOPLE ARE DETAINED WITHOUT ACCESS TO LEGAL COUNSEL..." - Speech to National Council of La Raza
By a combination of negligence and design the pathetically porous borders have managed to bless the people of the USA with anywhere from 12 to 20 millions illegal aliens. Obama is right that "the system isn't working". It is weak, ineffective and not effectively choking employment opportunities and benefits for illegals while failing to round them up and ship them out as quickly as they manage to arrive here.
As long as Mexico continues to dump its poverty and political dysfunctionality north of the border and America continues to coddle them once they arrive, there will be no solution to the massive and unprecedented illegal immigration crisis. What's good, though, is that Obama is twisting the arm of every American to learn Spanish, apparently so that we can communicate more readily with the millions upon millions of illegal aliens already in our midst.
2) - I could no more disown him than my own grandmother that once confessed to me she was afraid of black men she passed on the street.
- The infamous "throwing Grandma under the bus" quote delivered at a time when Obama was actually trying to defend hate speech peddler Rev. Jeremiah Wright. On multiple occasions Obama has made some disturbing comments in regards to race and he seems to struggle with his bi-racial heritage on a reoccurring basis.
3) - I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.
- Children are a punishment? Not a nice thing to say about one's possible future grandchildren. That is if one of his daughters makes a "mistake" but decided not to actually sacrifice it on the bloody altar of convenience. His grandchildren might someday find it very interesting what "Grandpa Obama" thought about them before they were even born.
It is in fact this very type of attitude towards little 'surprises' that leads to people resenting their children instead of loving and accepting them. Just because a child is unexpected shouldn't mean that it is antagonistically viewed as little more than a problem, inconvenience and undue burden that should automatically receive the death penalty for being 'a mistake' as defined by Obama.
4) - It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
- An elitist comment by an elitist delivered to a closed door group of elitists. Way to go Barack. I'd be mad but I'm a bit busy cleaning my gun and reading my Bible while angrily pushing one for English on the telephone. If I might take the liberty of quoting humorist and blogger Charlie Foxtrot:
"233 years ago, a group of bitter men clung to their guns and religion, driven by their antipathy towards people who weren't like them. In the end, I think it worked out OK."
5) - We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That's not leadership. That's not going to happen.
-Obama apparently calling for ration cards, government monitoring of your thermostat and the outlawing of your vehicle all at the same time. A totalitarian, socialist, nanny state mindset is not usually the best virtue to be found in a possible President of the United States. Can anyone show me in the Constitution where the government can tell me how much I can eat? That quote is downright disturbing, and perhaps a bit more revealing than the Obama camp would like to admit.
6) - We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom, the empathy to understand what it's like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old - and that's the criterion by which I'll be selecting my judges.
-I guess asking for an impartial, objective judge who enforces the law and doesn't legislate from the bench would be too much to ask. What was I thinking?
You can always tell a conservative from a liberal. One begins a sentence with the words "I think that..." while the other begins a sentence with "I feel that..." It's not all about feelings and emotions; sometimes you've got to be able to think as well.
7) - Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.
-More nonsense that barely makes any sense to anybody, But at least he'll bring "change", and that is what is more important than anything, isn't it? Not what kind of change, or the specifics of such change, or whether it is change for the better or for the worse. Does one dare mention the fact that change for the sake of change is intellectually adolescent at best?
8) - We should be more modest in our belief that we can impose democracy on a country through military force. In the past, it has been movements for freedom from within tyrannical regimes that have led to flourishing democracies; movements that continue today. This doesn't mean abandoning our values and ideals; wherever we can, it's in our interest to help foster democracy through the diplomatic and economic resources at our disposal. But even as we provide such help, we should be clear that the institutions of democracy - free markets, a free press, a strong civil society - cannot be built overnight, and they cannot be built at the end of a barrel of a gun. And so we must realize that the freedoms FDR once spoke of - especially freedom from want and freedom from fear - do not just come from deposing a tyrant and handing out ballots; they are only realized once the personal and material security of a people is ensured as well.
-Obama apparently slept through fifth grade history class. I wonder if he understands that both Japan and Germany (and a good number of other countries) had democracy imposed on them from the "barrel of a gun". I'm just asking. This quote also contradicts his repeated efforts to abandon Iraq to the various groups of thugs waiting in the wings who wouldn't mind making a play for power if the US abandons Iraq. So much for "free markets, a free press, [and] a strong civil society - cannot be built overnight". Picking up your ball and going home in a huff in the middle of the game won't accomplish those goals either.
In war you have to play to win, do whatever it takes to win, and accept no substitute for the destruction or neutralization of your enemy and the accomplishment of your goal. The Surge was two years later than it should have been, bitterly opposed by Obama and his cabal, and only McCain seems to have had it right all along. If you are going to fight, then you better fight to win. The enemy of Islamic jihadism, fundamentalism and radicalism has no such wavering, flip flopping, concern for the enemy and crisis of conscience. Neither should the heirs and protectors of Western Civilization.
Of the two major political candidates for president, one is willing to lose the war so that he can win the election. The other would rather win the war than win the election.
9) - Like no other illness, AIDS tests our ability to put ourselves in someone else's shoes -- to empathize with the plight of our fellow man. While most would agree that the AIDS orphan or the transfusion victim or the wronged wife contracted the disease through no fault of their own, it has too often been easy for some to point to the unfaithful husband or the promiscuous youth or the gay man and say 'This is your fault. You have sinned.' I don't think that's a satisfactory response. My faith reminds me that we all are sinners.
- Apparently no one is to blame for the behaviors and practices that spreads such deadly, but entirely preventable, diseases (except for the conservative who fails to cheerlead and excuse it). And to not call sin, sin, is to deny the obvious, obscure the truth, excuse the inexcusable and in the end only contribute to the devastating plague that has killed millions instead of acknowledging the truth that could save the lives of millions more. We are all sinners, but wallowing in sin and not recognizing that actions have consequences can have serious, and deadly, results.
10) - I found the tears running down my cheeks.- from Obama's book Dreams from My Father when describing the sermons Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
-It is one thing to rather callously hook up with a church for "street cred" to gain an entry into a certain voting bloc community (Wright was Obama's ticket into acceptance by Chicago's black community) but to subject one's own offspring and spouse to racist, paranoid, twisted and anti-American vitriol as well as to those who advocate such sickening philosophies for years on end is not only questionable, but downright disgusting and objectionable. If a Caucasian presidential candidate had done the same he'd be lucky to garner 15% of the vote, but Obama is given the usual pass solely based on his race and ideology. What a tragic commentary on the current state of politics and statesmanship in this country.
And to show my generosity, kindness and willingness to go the extra mile I'd like to also add a couple more "reasons" why Obama is pathetically unqualified to the be the next leader of the free world.
[03-14-08] - The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign...
[03-18-08] - Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.
Will the real Barack please stand up? Which is it? You can't have it both ways. I demand answers and the truth. By the way, it would appear that Mr. Obama is woefully uninformed on what actually comes forth from the average pastor, priest or rabbi. If anyone has actually watched the various clips of the good Reverend at his best it is amazing that Barry could stand ten minutes of that, let alone twenty-three years worth. Obama has defended, funded, entertained and encouraged what is little more than a rotten river of sludge from the man that has been his pastor for the last two decades. Shame on him for supporting and legitimizing such drivel.
In the end, I believe that the American people do not need the government to be their savior, doctor, nanny, nutritionist, psychologist, and mother regulating and dictating every aspect of an individuals life. We are free citizens not serfs, subjects or slaves.
Democrats are increasingly experiencing buyer's remorse for anointing a puppet of the hard Left to be their presidential candidate. His inexperience, nanny state complex, and questionable views on a wide variety of issues should make all thinking and intelligent people take a long pause before voting for a person who is so stunningly unqualified, ill- suited and unready to be the next President of the United States.
Was this article informative?
Categories:
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The Top Ten Reasons Barack Obama Should Not Be President.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://poliwatch.org/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/8862
Expand - Collapse Comment
David R. Remer said at :
11:24 PM, 07 23 2008 | Permalink
David H,
The photo itself says it all. For all we know, that photo may have been taken in the immediate aftermath of Obama saving a small child from a burning building. But, those opposed to a Black man, a man, a young man, a one term US Senator, or a non-republican would use that photo to show the world how THEY want to see Obama.
As for the issues,
1) You said in purely hyperbolic form: "What's good, though, is that Obama is twisting the arm of every American to learn Spanish, apparently so that we can communicate more readily with the millions upon millions of illegal aliens already in our midst."
Are you not aware that children who learn two languages retain higher IQ and creativity scores in general throughout their lives as opposed to single language children? Dual language learning in our schools is as fundamental to better education and minds as math.
Are you opposed to legal immigrants learning a second language, English? No, I thought not. Neither is Obama.
As for #2 and Rev. Wright, that story has been vetted. Obama was no present nor aware of all the inflammatory remarks made by Wright. In fact, his career has very often prevented his attending that Church over the years, with a great many sermons missed.
My father revered Adolph Hitler and said the world would have been a better place if he had won WWII. What does that make me, his son? My writings and my own mind speak for me, not my relations, loved ones, or acquaintances. Same is true for Obama. Don't go to his barber or pastor to find out what Obama thinks, listen to the man himself.
3) YES! ABSOLUTELY. America has millions of women whose lives are punished by the untimely and accidental birth of a child, before they have had the opportunities to finish school, get good employment, and find a solid and supporting mate.
You twist Obama's words with the best of the Rovians. Obama NEVER said children are a punishment, in the global context your reply purports. He was of course, referring NOT to the BABY as a punishment, but, to the accident of an unwanted pregnancy. That is incredibly obvious.
As for #4, with a psychology background, I have to say Obama is absolutely right. People do cling to their values tightly when they are threatened or under stress, which was precisely Obama's point.
Any good sociology course will reveal that traditional values and traditions themselves are a short cut for generally making the right responses or decisions without having to invent the Socratic dialectic to arrive at a decision or appropriate response to a threatening or stressful situation.
That is what Basic Training in our military is all about. Inculcating a set of values that won't require the soldier to pause and think, and thereby, increase the risk of being shot or failing to prevent their comrades from being shot. As a former platoon sergeant, I can tell you that Obama's comment was very astute, though politically a flub, because so many REALLY don't want the truth from politicians. Many can't handle the truth, to paraphrase Jack Nicholson's Col. character in charge of GITMO.
#5, your reply:
"Obama apparently calling for ration cards, government monitoring of your thermostat and the outlawing of your vehicle all at the same time."
is not apparent at all. One has to really twist the Obama's words and impregnate them with hyperbole to get that from what he said. What he said was America is going to have to make some sacrifices if she is to become energy independent. Taking words out of context is a common political trick, but, not very effective on a blog where others can put it back in context.
#6, yes David, your asking for a judge who doesn't discriminate against people because of their marital status, sexual orientation, or economic status would be too much to expect from a Republican president's appointees. The law, afterall, as Obama rightly points out, does not call for, but, in fact, prohibits such discrimination. So, it would be a good thing to have judges with empathy and respect for the law since the law was designed for the least of Americans, as well as the most powerful. A concept lost on most Republicans in leadership today.
#7, sorry, wrong, David. Makes perfect sense to Democrats to whom he was speaking. Again, context is important to understanding.
As for #8, it was Japan and Germany who declared war and lost. The Japanese and German people acknowledging their defeat, acquiesced to the victors and defenders of their aggressive attacks.
That too is in your 5th grade history books, and highlights the fundamental departure from Iraq, who DID NOT invade the U.S., and whose people did not support aggression against the U.S. but, who paid as dear a price as the Germans and Japanese for AMERICA's Aggression into their country. The Downing Street Memo is now a 6 year old historical fact as well, in which Bush is caught stating he would fabricate evidence to sell the American people on the invasion of Iraq.
It's probably not in grade school history books, yet. But, it certainly is in college history books.
#9, what a typical Republican response. Totally devoid of the ability to walk in another's shoes, and devoid of compassion for those who contracted AIDS by means not of their choosing or by means which Republicans engage in regularly, like extra-marital sex, and even hustling gay contacts in airport bathrooms like one Republican Senator from Idaho, I know of.
As for #10, I reiterate #9, and add that your comment clearly reflects an abject poverty of understanding of what it is to be Black in America, and the experience of being Black In America, which CNN's series on the topic covers so adeptly. Your comment appears to reflect that this series is not on your fave list. Nor is any interest in the history and sociology of being raised Black in America.
The good news is, the historical era that causes folks like Rev. Wright to think and feel as they do, is fading, and the younger generations are increasingly less race conscious and therefore, less racially cruel toward toward other races. Wright is Old School. Obama is New School. That much is as plain as the nose on one's face.
These paltry and cheap attempts to put other's words and beliefs into Obama's mouth and character are truly desperate measures designed to appeal the lowest of intellects. Fortunately for the GOP, there are plenty of those to go around, and so they actually can get McCain within 6 points of Obama in the national polls. Really quite amazing, but, further evidence that our schools have been failing our children for a very long time.
Your comments regarding Wright and Obama, smack of McCarthyism and guilt by association. Thankfully, the years of such tactics by the GOP are drawing to a close. Amen!
Us Indies would like a change of pace by going after Dem's failings and weaknesses for a change. Change, that's what we will get with Obama. More good than under Bush, and less incompetence than under McCain. Obama is no second coming of Christ however, and there will be plenty to critique under his presidency as well, no doubt.
Obama's dodging of the Mexican border security issue is one we don't have to wait for his swearing in to begin with. Obama's decision to retain Bush's policy of federal funding of church related activities is another.
If you want to go after Obama, he has issue positions that easily lend themselves to criticism and critique. One does not have to fabricate, take out of context, or convict by association, in order to diminish any illusions of his perfection. Something to consider going forward.
McCain and you make the same mistake. Attacking a candidate's strengths, is by definition, a foolish strategy and tactic, because to do so, requires distortion and deception, which simply reflects back on the attackers, not the object of their attacks. McCain is actually losing this race all by himself. Obama could shut up till November and McCain's own attacks on Obama would sink McCain's boat. And this after McCain's idle promise to run a clean campaign.
Implying and stating forthrightly that Obama is a traitor to his own country by choosing to lose an American war in order to win an election, is holding premature detonating munitions in your own boat. So much for McCain's clean campaign, eh?
Bush lost the war in Iraq years ago, along with the ability to find an exit strategy. Obama has played no part in the absolutely criminal invasion of Iraq, nor the abyssmal failure to secure this podunk little country in less time than it took to secure Italy, Germany, and Japan in WWII.
Pathetic what Republican leadership can fail to accomplish with the mightiest military and economy in the world.
David R. Remer | July 23, 2008 11:24 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
RickIL said at :
8:15 AM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
David M
In the end, I believe that the American people do not need the government to be their savior, doctor, nanny, nutritionist, psychologist, and mother regulating and dictating every aspect of an individuals life. We are free citizens not serfs, subjects or slaves
If you really believe that anyone is advocating the above then you should probably be examining the extent of your gullibility and or willingness to accept and spread manufactured, inflammatory and false accusation.
His inexperience, nanny state complex, and questionable views on a wide variety of issues should make all thinking and intelligent people take a long pause before voting for a person who is so stunningly unqualified, ill- suited and unready to be the next President of the United States
I have taken a pause and considered the options and I am unable to find another candidate who is any more qualified or credible than Obama. All I see is a whiny old man who has nothing clever, creative or new to offer. He has no solutions because he is part of the problem.
It also seems to me that we already have a republican president who has proved to be stunningly unqualified, ill suited and never was ready to be the POTUS. How has that worked out? Is McCain really any different? I see no indication that he is. He certainly is not, nor has he ever been the Maverick you folks claim he is. He changes positions more often that he changes his depends. He is a republican tried and true who has supported failed republican policy over 90% of the time. Is more of what has failed us really what is good for us?
As for the rest of your article. Well it is nothing new and you obviously are presenting it in the context you wish to use it in, not necessarily in the context it was originally intended. The latter is glaringly obvious to any intelligent, free thinking voter capable of thought.
RickIL | July 24, 2008 8:15 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
d.a.n said at :
10:25 AM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
Both Obama's and McCain's position and voting records on illegal immigration are pathetic. McCain voted for the 1st shamnesty of year 1986, which more than quadrupled the problem. Obama says people cling to "anti-immigrant" sentiments (conveniently omitting the fact that there's a big difference between legal and illegal immigrants). Thus, it is hard to give my vote to either one of them.
They argue compassion for the illegal aliens, but that misplaced compassion equates to despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other. Besides, it's doubtful compassion for the illegal aliens has that much to do with it. It is more likely that votes and profits have much more to do with it.
The true villians here are not the illegal aliens . . . it's the despicable incumbent politicians that pit Americans and illegal aliens against each other for votes, profits, and/or misplaced compassion.
d.a.n | July 24, 2008 10:25 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
j2t2 said at :
11:56 AM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
Mr. Huntwork
Regarding reason 1, does Senator McCain advocate for changing the root cause of the problem, which is NAFTA, or does he advocate for the Bush approach which as we all know is to do nothing? Maybe his voting record tells the tale huh?
On reason 5 doesnt Senator McCain support drilling in ANWR, which makes little sense in both the long and short term, as the answer to energy and climate change problems? Just more of the same isnt it?
For item 8 Im sure most americans are as tired as I am of the WWII comparison. We have tried the McCain way for years under Bush. If the reason for the invasion of Iraq was to secure oil rights then the surge was successful. Seems the bribes to the local warlords was also successful in toning down the violence during the same time period. Obama's comment shows leadership and I for one am impressed.
The repubs sure do spend a lot of time running Obama down with a lot of misrepresented facts and even more fiction. Why not tell us the 10 reasons why your parties choice, Senator McCain, should be president. Wouldnt a "4 more of the same" message touch the voting public and encourage them to vote for the repub candidate?
The guilt by association issues in your article may end up backfiring on you when you consider the company Senator McCain has been keeping the past 20 years in office, not to mention being married to a child stealing drug addict who stole from charities to support her habit. (Oops what a cheap shot even if it is half true. But you get my point doncha?)
The American people are growing increasingly tired of the repubs worn out rhetoric. Help out your party and lead the way to honest debate on the important issues, dont be a lapdog for Rove and his ilk. Short term it may not be pretty for the repubs but long term perhaps they could regain some credibility.
j2t2 | July 24, 2008 11:56 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
petelst1171 said at :
1:29 PM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
Are socialists the only ones reading this article? Unbelievable! Even more unbelievable is this:
"I have taken a pause and considered the options and I am unable to find another candidate who is any more qualified or credible than Obama."
So you paused for what, 5 seconds? Less? Can't find another more qualified candidate? How about Hillary? Governor Richardson? Chris Dodd? Barbara Boxer? The Incredible Hulk? Not that I would vote for any one of these either, but at least they have served a day or two longer and have considerable more experience than B. Hussien Obama! (okay, okay, the Hulk is a little less qualified, but...)Tell me, please, how 142 days in the U.S. Senate qualifies this person for the Presidency? And what did he do during those 142 days? Author any legislation? co-sponsor any legislation? (maybe that, but...) Offer any by-partisan co-operation or tranquility? Poke his naval? I don't know of ANYTHING he has done to earn him the Messiah label you leftists have bestowed on him!
He makes his own rules, MSM goes gaa-gaa and falls lock-step in behind him! He pulls crap no Republican would EVER get a pass on. He switches positions and makes gaffs that would embarrass a intelligent 8th grader. Has he visited all 58 states yet, or is there still one or two more he has to get to? This from a Presidential candidate? Gimme a break!
And this credibility you speak of... Where, what, how, ... WHAT credibility? From whom? How did he earn it? Was it bestowed on him by the Academy? Susan Sarandan? Pulleeeease!
The reasons to vote against this guy could fill a book and have NOTHING to do with race! Unfortunately, as in 1992, we have dishonest media promoting a empty suit; and lazy, mindless, lemming Americans ready to leap without reading or a lick of curiosity about what "change" means!
God have mercy on our once great nation!
petelst1171 | July 24, 2008 1:29 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David R. Remer said at :
3:31 PM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
petelst1171 said: "He [Obama] pulls crap no Republican would EVER get a pass on."
You mean like falsifying the pretext for war, nearly doubling the national debt in 8 years, bilking the American tax payer for a quarter trillion dollars in waste, fraud, and abuse of their taxes.
No, I think the Republicans got a pass on far more than Obama ever could hope to. Obama is hit by the MSM for what his barber or pastor says. There is no comparison.
But, your comments are obviously not based on the issues or record. I can understand that. The cognitive dissonance over reviewing the Republican record would be just too much to bare.
David R. Remer | July 24, 2008 3:31 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
RickIL said at :
3:47 PM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
Petelst
I need add nothing more than Obama is an extremely intelligent well educated man capable of good insight with excellent communication skills. He has excelled during his rather short term in public office. When he speaks, people listen because they feel that he is genuine in his thoughts and they feel as though he actually cares about them. Combine these obvious skills with a solid executive staff and you have a more than capable POTUS.
Unfortunately for McCain he comes from an antiquated era of thought that comes off as old school rhetoric lacking in conviction. He is part of that tarnished group of politicians that places the needs of the wealthy above the rest of us. In short he represents a lot of what is currently wrong in government today. Not to mention that he and his party fail to see the need for new approaches to the concerns of what is now a global society. A society whose problems will require working in a globally contextual format. Not a format based on the wants of the ultra wealthy.
RickIL | July 24, 2008 3:47 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
RickIL said at :
4:27 PM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
Dan
The true villians here are not the illegal aliens . . . it's the despicable incumbent politicians that pit Americans and illegal aliens against each other for votes, profits, and/or misplaced compassion
I agree. I find it shameful and embarrassing that our politicians use this issue to garner votes. It is a serious one that needs to be addressed. I do not know or pretend to know the answer to this dilemma. I think it is a very complicated issue which needs serious thought and probably vast amounts of money to effect a suitable solution. Given the fact that our government will not even enforce current immigration laws makes anything new seem very distant. One thing is for sure. In the end someone or some governmental entity will have to take the bull by the horns and piss some people off, even at the risk of losing votes or popularity. Hopefully it won't take another 9/11 to instigate that change.
RickIL | July 24, 2008 4:27 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
Rocky Marks said at :
5:12 PM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
Huntwork,
All your spinning is making me dizzy.
Seems to me that the right has a hard time differentiating between fact and opinion.
Dudes, you guys are welcome to your opinion but not your own facts.
You're going to have to do better than the fringe right pundit talking points and fear to convince anybody with any brains that McCain is electable.
Rocky Marks | July 24, 2008 5:12 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David R. Remer said at :
8:44 PM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
Rocky, McCain is very electable. It only requires Obama to stumble, according to the polls.
We can differ on the candidates, but, it is foolhardy, in my opinion, for anyone to assume this race is a foregone conclusion. Which gives both Dems and Repubs and Indies for one or the other candidate, hope and work before them.
I do not believe deception and falsehoods, and twisting truth and reality are the avenue to success, however. The candidate who speaks the most truth and makes the most common sense to the voters, especially the Indies, will in all likelihood win.
I believe the old style politics employed by D. Huntwork in this article, will not prevail. The electorate has grown up some, tuned in more, and are demanding more than political sophistry. Even if they don't know what that word means, many more of them than ever before know old style political bull crap when they hear it.
America suffered through Nixon and Carter, and America will suffer through McCain's inadequacies if need be. But, with a 10 trillion national debt, 3/4 of a trillion dollars exported to foreign nations each year in trade imbalances, and a crumbling, instead of growing middle class, the suffering will be great indeed if Republicans retain control. It was afterall, Republicans who created this terrible set of circumstances over the last 5.5 years. (With help from some Democrats in Congress I might add.)
David R. Remer | July 24, 2008 8:44 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
Michael Ejercito said at :
8:57 PM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
Senator Obama defended infanticide.
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=7558749&blogID=408582520&Mytoken=F9E20408-2CCF-4D5E-9B31365EE3D8DB9212901674
Michael Ejercito | July 24, 2008 8:57 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David M. Huntwork said at :
10:47 PM, 07 24 2008 | Permalink
Watching the fine folks of our new site twist themselves into pretzels trying to defend the quotes and policies of Obama is interesting to watch. Liberals in particular are so predictable. Mention virtually anything and it quickly becomes .."but,but,but what about Bush...and uh, McCain is old, and a REPUBLICAN to boot..."
David M. Huntwork | July 24, 2008 10:47 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David R. Remer said at :
12:12 AM, 07 25 2008 | Permalink
David H., and despite the facts and context contained in those 'buts' you refer to, your comment doesn't seem to have any interest whatsoever in their veracity, factualness, or relevance as alternative or explanatory perspectives.
Believe me when I say, I do get your perspective - let no good trait of your Party's opponent candidate go untarnished by distortion, twisting, and sophistry. I get it. It is old school politics having no factual basis nor relevance to the issues and directions the candidate fosters.
Like the CSpan Caller who said, if Obama is elected this country will be run for Blacks, and the Whites might as well just become emigrants. That may be what the caller truly believes, but, it is not true, nor factually supported, by anything Obama expresses or in any leadership act as a politician.
Your O'Reilly like Spin Zone comments are like this CSpan caller's. You and others may believe them to be true, but, that belief does not make them true or credible under scrutiny. Those are the polling facts.
If all that you say were true, it is pretty inexplicable why Obama continually leads in the polls. McCain has the majority support on character and military leadership according to the polls. Yet, Obama continues to lead and improve his numbers wherever he appears in person. Obviously, more Americans do not 'interpret' Obama's words as you and loyal Republican supporters do.
Facts are stubborn things - despite all attempts to squelch them. Global Warming was one of those facts Republicans tried to make untrue through their rhetoric and sophistry. It has backfired on them in the gravest of ways, politically.
Bob Dylan once wrote in a song: "When will they ever learn?"
David R. Remer | July 25, 2008 12:12 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David M. Huntwork said at :
12:27 AM, 07 25 2008 | Permalink
But that's the beauty of a column like this, the candidate provides the evidence and the substance. I only supplied a bit of commentary. This could have been nothing but Obama quotes and been just as bit disturbing, if not more so to anyone to the right of Hillary Clinton. I had a hard time narrowing it down to just the 10 (actually 12) quotes displayed here, but they are a good sampling of the nanny state, hard left, and the factually faulty beliefs that is the essence of Barack Obama.
I didn't even touch the fish on the dock flipping and flopping in regards to flag pins, Iraq, or a number of other issues not to mention his unabashed stand that rising gas prices are actually a good thing but that it was unfortunate that 'it happened so quickly'. I could do two or three more of these type of columns without breaking a sweat. But the fainting, thrill running up their leg, praise be, Obama is our savior, you aren't cool until you see him in person, Barry can do no wrong crowd defend every breath that passes through his lips even while individuals like myself merely point out that the Emperor wears no clothes.
Be very careful what you wish for, because you might actually get it.
David M. Huntwork | July 25, 2008 12:27 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
Rocky Marks said at :
3:51 PM, 07 25 2008 | Permalink
Huntwork,
"I could do two or three more of these type of columns without breaking a sweat. But the fainting, thrill running up their leg, praise be, Obama is our savior, you aren't cool until you see him in person, Barry can do no wrong crowd defend every breath that passes through his lips even while individuals like myself merely point out that the Emperor wears no clothes."
It gives me pause to think that there are many people on the right that are seemingly so incapable of original thought.
People that are willing to merely parrot the drivel spewed by the pundits on the fringes, because it makes them uncomfortable to actually think for themselves.
These talking points you seem so fond of may play well in the trailer parks where the inhabitants are so fearful they see a terrorist behind every bush (pun intended), but attempting to paint every Obama supporter as a mere sycophant looking for a Savior is pure propaganda
Why is the right so willing to accept this propaganda as fact, and why are they so willing to repeat this same propaganda so often as if to make it fact?
You say the emperor has no clothes, yet McCain has been hanging out in the nudist colony we call Washington DC far longer than Obama, and has been associated with folks that have truly screwed the American people.
Yet you guys seem more interested in the notion that Obama might be a closet Muslim simply because his middle name is Hussein.
How lame is that?
Rocky
Rocky Marks | July 25, 2008 3:51 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
Stephen Daugherty said at :
4:35 PM, 07 26 2008 | Permalink
1) In a country where civil liberties are cherished, it will always be more difficult to round up suspects than it would be under a system where the authority of the government always remains unquestioned.
We have more than enough people to kick out all of them. However, the question then becomes, who are the right people to kick out, and will we do more damage uprooting people than engaging in a limited amnesty followed by improved enforcement of our laws?
2) Your effective statement here is that anything negative said about his grandmother would constitute him throwing her under the bus. The whole point of what he said was that he knew people who had some degree of resentments and prejudice, but that neither got in the way of them being good people, nor of him having love and affection for those people.
You set up a rather ironic contrast: his forgiving attitude to your relentless pursuit on behalf of poor old grandma. The real question, if you follow her activities (she's worked on his behalf) is whether she needs or even wants your help.
3) It was an inartful way of saying "punished with a pregnancy". I can understand the confusion, but confusion it is. Obama is pro-choice, with a secular attitude towards abortion on public policy. This is undeniable. But what many who are pro-life miss, and what I have observed, as a former pro-choice person is that, if you take a more secular view of pregnancy, then all the connotations of blood guilt don't even enter the picture.
For a person who takes the secular point of view on this issue, while the decision is not one to be taken lightly, it is not typically a sacrifice on the bloody altar of convenience, but rather a question of responsibility, social and personal. It might be irresponsible, from that point of view, to carry an embryo to term that neither the father or the mother wanted, or in his daughter's cases have the maturity to care for.
4) The essential thesis of what he was saying is that when the economy screws you over, when the government screws you over, you find refuge in the things you love and care about. Other statements by him indicate that he is in no wise disrespectful of this. But of course, that's not what the devoted avengers of verbal gaffes will look for.
5) Ration cards? Government Monitoring? Outlawing of vehicles?
Strawman. We lead by example, or we undermine our leadership with hypocrisy. Conservation need not be a socialist enterprise, but the government cannot stand idly by and do nothing. This is a matter of concern to all Americans, so much so that the guy who helped fund the SwiftVets in the last election, an oil billionaire, is pushing solar, wind, and cleaner fuels as the wave of the future.
While you're busy indulging in paranoid fantasies of government invasiveness, you're irresponsibly discounting the real and practical things that the government, and only the government can do to change things for the better, things that will, in the long term preserve our economic stability, rather than ravage it. However, it won't get cheaper the longer we wait to do things.
6) Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back for not being touchy-feely. A judge must consider all points of view in order to be truly impartial. If they harden themselves to such influences, they might be impartial by the letter of the law, but not in terms of its spirit.
Too often, folks have labored to take the judgment out of judging, to shackle judges to arbitrary sentencing guidelines. While a judge should not write law from the bench, the legislative branch should not force interpretation from Congress's chambers.
The law should not be dead to the average person's experience, nor should the judge lose touch with the communities they are asked to apply the judgment of the law to. Down your road, eventually lies the divorce of common sense and messy reality from the logic and the interpretation of the law. And that, my friend, could not rightly be called justice.
7) It makes sense to me. This is a Democracy. We can wait and hope that somebody else will help elect the right people, that somebody else will do the work necessary to improve our lives, or we can start voting and speaking out and educating ourselves so that we can influence the course of our own society, of our own lives. America will not return to the moon unless it decides as a nation to make that a priority. It will not reduce deficits until it decides, as a country, that such is a priority.
There are challenges Americans have to face together, and that means facing it as individuals, as well as a group.
8) Obama didn't sleep through anything, your party did. We had the war won. Their governments surrendered, and cooperated. It's easier to create Democracies when the folks who are supposed to be the rulers to be aren't actively fighting in the streets.
In Iraq, though, we never established the stability or orchestrated the transfer of power from Saddam's government properly, and because of that, our efforts to create the kind of Democracy we would recognize in America, a functional Democracy short of that, failed.
The truth is, we never really showed up like we should have in Iraq. We didn't bring our "A" game. The individual soldiers have done their best, but Bush never devoted the resources to this fight that the allies brought to WWII and the post-war occupations. Bush tried to plant Democracy without enough soldiers, without enough planning or development, more or less attempting to change Iraq through laissez faire magic pony wishful thinking more than practical restructuring, like we saw in WWII.
As for your charge that "Obama and his Cabal" were the ones who forestalled putting more soldiers in Iraq, that's revisionist history at its worst. In 2004, Obama supported Kerry, who in turn supported adding soldiers to the Army. In 2004, the Republicans supported Bush, who in turn supported Rumsfeld, who in turn blocked both things like the Anbar Awakening and any increase of the soldiers in Iraq. The Republicans had control of both relevant branches right up until 2006, and it was losing one of those, the legislative branch, that lead Bush to can Rumsfeld and change policy from "staying the course", which was essentially, the low manpower, wait-em-out approach you're blaming Obama for.
9) Everybody makes mistakes. It is the height of arrogance and impiety to think that God needs help in punishing sinners. Christianity calls upon us to help the sick, visit the imprisoned, and comfort the Dying. If we smugly hold ourselves aloof, we do not bring Gods judgment on those people, but instead on ourselves.
10) You can't get much more silly than casting doubt on Obama's emotional reaction. Reverend Wright, though he obviously said what he said, did not say those things all the time. He built himself a position of great respect through a varied career of different sermons. As a Republican, you obviously want to find fault with him, and find it as deeply as you can, but while he's not an admirable man, it is not impossible for people like him to have admirable qualities that impress others.
As for your either-or dilemma? It's false. He could have been absent for the sermons in question, and still hear other stuff that wasn't politically correct. But of course, for the sake of expedience in political rhetoric, you're not going to present us with that third choice.
Very well: Rev Wright can say things that are salty, or challenging to the conventional wisdom, that don't rise to the level of GD the USA, or anything like that. Obama can be there for that. But if it is a sin to be present for controversial preaching, then you Republicans have much to answer for. Remember Ron Parsley? Remember John Hagee? Remember Jerry Fallwell, and all those nice people who have spent their careers making the same kind of unapologetic controversial statements?
You see, I see them the same way. The Republicans don't, not at the moment. They feel they are privileged to invoke God's judgment, privileged to criticize mainstream foreign policy, privileged to be America's monitors of morality. And this privilege, they guard jealously.
The American people need an active, involved government, limited and defined not by some party's notion of its needs, but the country's perception of them. This is Democracy. Perfect or imperfect, a political elite should not sit on top of the government getting in the way of the will of the people. Were this not a Democracy, violence would probably be the eventual result of such intractable authoritarianism. Fortunately, as a Democracy, the people will clear the roadblocks on the road to progress by votes rather than force.
The Republicans should count themselves fortunate in that regard.
Stephen Daugherty | July 26, 2008 4:35 PM
Reply to this comment