You are currently browsing the tag archive for the 'Election 2008' tag.
Somehow I found this interesting little post in a very weird place… Mike Gravel’s web site!
“Obama seems to be getting a lot of support from republicans and that generally doesn’t bother me since a lot of people supported Kerry who were republicans unhappy with Bush and that happens all the time. What is bothering me is that neocons seem to be going to Obama’s camp including a cofounder of the PNAC group. Has anybody heard about this? Matthew Dowd is now jumping on Obama’s band wagon and he was a chief strategist of Bush’s 2004 campaign and Robert Kagan is the PNAC member who likes Obama and what he has been saying. I just am getting iffy vibes and I think Obama is trying to please too many people instead of standing up for his own values and that is causing all these people to come to Obama’s camp from Bush’s. Could they be getting ready to get Obama to be the PNAC’s new Bush to continue what they started with Iran and Syria? Obama has said all options are on the table with Iran. I’m just getting really nervous about this and it’s making me uncomfortable and I want to know what you guys think.
Here’s a link with the story:
Republicans defect to the Obama camp“
So you wanna know what I think SouthernBelle82?
I love it! Maybe now I won’t have to explain this neocon stupidity over and over again…
There are some interesting quirks about Tom Hanks’ endorsement of Obama.
He basically says that electing a black man would be a historic improvement for the US, comparable to Washington’s handing off power to Adams. It’s hard to disagree that having a black man being president of the most powerful country of the world is a good thing. Especially because this is a white majority country that has a nasty past of discrimination.
However, this is looking at facts without really understanding the context. Ironically, Tom Hanks gives us a great example of how easy it is to fall in this trap. He mentions that this is a country where “people of his skin color were only worth three fifths of a human being”. Well, Tom should know that the famous 3/5 compromise was made to decrease the power of slave owners in the south. Initially, southern states wanted to count slaves’ votes entirely, something that would give them much more power since slaves would obviously be forced to vote for their masters. By counting only 3 votes for every 5 slaves the Northern states hoped to tame that vicious cycle and elect more representatives that could outlaw slavery.
That is: even though the 3/5 compromise sounds horrible, it was clearly the better of two very imperfect options.
I see our country in a similar situation now. Electing a black man sounds like a great thing to do. It would show people how great the American democracy is, and maybe work as a message that could help other minorities around the world.
But for the most part the world doesn’t work based on imagery and pure ideology. What really matters is what the US actually does. Things like whether we will continue to be a force for free trade and democracy. What would be the message to places like Mexico and China if we start to say that we can only trade if they follow exactly our labor code? Will democracy be weaker or stronger if we just leave Iraq behind and say “sorry, we changed our minds folks!”
Are we willing to risk everything just to improve our image?
Tom is right in one thing: History with capital H will be made this November no matter who the elected candidate is. The question is whether people will understand what their choice is really about.
Transcript: Obama’s Remarks on Wright
“Yesterday, we saw a very different vision of America. I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle that we saw yesterday.
You know, I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992. I have known Reverend Wright for almost 20 years. The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church.
They certainly don’t portray accurately my values and beliefs. And if Reverend Wright thinks that that’s political posturing, as he put it, then he doesn’t know me very well. And based on his remarks yesterday, well, I may not know him as well as I thought, either.”
Well, well. Whatever happened to the old uncle theory? What happened to The Speech? To the man who inspired one of his books?
Clearly, Obama had only two options in this whole debacle:
- Ride out the storm and continue on the side of his buddy
- Do what he did: Distance himself from the loon
It actually surprises me that he chose option 2 since he was on option 1 big time until the last few weeks. It is a big bet, and I think it might not work because we are so late in the game. Not only people won’t believe that he doesn’t agree with the racist remarks of Wright, black voters might consider him a traitor.
I think the Golden Man is in big trouble.
Obama reports income of $4.2 million in 2007 tax returns
Can you imagine the kind of crazy rationalization that the left needs to engage to explain how Obama can be at the same time a millionaire (probably on the top 0.01% bracket) and their racial discriminated hero, anti-elite, representative of the oppressed candidate?
More than the huge amount on itself, I was surprised by the amazing increase in earnings (In 2006, Obama and his wife reported income of $991,296). Talk about depressed wages!
But as an incorrigible right winger, the truth is that I couldn’t help but feel bad for the guy… After all he paid $1.4 million in taxes (and that is after donating $240,370 to charity)!!!
Ah, the things you see in racist America…
The messiah greeting some typical white people
Here is Mr.Magic showing his true self (finally):
“610 WIP host Angelo Cataldi asked Obama about his Tuesday morning speech on race at the National Constitution Center in which he referenced his own white grandmother and her prejudice. Obama told Cataldi that “The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity, but that she is a typical white person. If she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know – there’s a reaction in her that’s been bred into our experiences that don’t go away and sometimes come out in the wrong way and that’s just the nature of race in our society. We have to break through it. What makes me optimistic is you see each generation feeling less like that. And that’s pretty powerful stuff”
Typical? Can you imagine what would be people’s reaction if I said that Obama’s ideas are… typical of black people? More, if he thinks that of his grandma, can you imagine what he thinks of regular white people? What a “uniter” this guy is!
But that doesn’t count right? I am only saying that because I am a typical white.
Is that the *CHANGE* people want for this country? Is that the new unity and love that Mr. MagicBama will bring to this country?
This one is even worse than the other. The number of celebs and the degree of gaga and infatuation is really unheard of.
This is really becoming like a cult.
Here is what the latest polls show:
In a general-election match-up among registered voters, McCain is 2 points ahead of Obama, within the margin of error; he beats Clinton by 6 points.
McCain runs ahead of Obama on every issue except health care. The Arizona senator has a 13-point advantage on Iraq and a 37- point lead on terrorism. He also does better on managing the economy. One area where Obama has a clear edge is on the question of who would bring the most change in Washington; the Illinois senator has an almost 3-to-1 lead.
When it comes to who has the right experience to lead the nation, McCain has a 12-point lead over Clinton, compared with a 31-point advantage over Obama.
In another sign of strength for McCain, more than half of Republican voters say they are happy with him as their nominee, including a majority of conservatives.
Independents appear to be a significant problem for Clinton in a general election. While she has strong favorable ratings from Democrats, at 82 percent, just 48 percent of independents agree. Obama has a 63 percent favorable rating among independents, while McCain has a 65 percent positive rating.
I am amazed at how people are just fine and dandy with all this race rhetoric being used by Obama.
Mr. Smarto says that is totally OK to say that you are voting for him because he is black because this has to do with “the social class of the majority of blacks“.
It is another layer to the fallacy. And a funny one when you think about it. I wonder if this trick could work anywhere…
Let’s say that I decided to run for some public office. Would it be ok if I advertised myself as “the candidate for the poor Latino immigrant community” just because I am a immigrant from Latin America?
Do you think it would still work when people realized that I have blue eyes and very light skin?
Or do you think the breaking point would be that… well… I am not poor?
What is the scale here? Could I pull it off if I were poorer but still white? Or would it be better if I were brown but still not poor? Would it help if I say that I am not concerned about being shot because people get shot all the time in Brazil???
This is a bullshit argument no matter how you look at it. To say that Obama represents something more just because of his skin color is totally racist. There is no rationalization that can get you out of this. A straw man is a straw man, no matter what color you paint it.
At first it seemed like a few random cases of lassitude among Mary Chapin Carpenter devotees in Berkeley, Cambridge and Chapel Hill. But then psychotherapists began to realize patients across the country were complaining of the same distress. They were experiencing the first hints of what’s bound to be a national phenomenon: Obama Comedown Syndrome. The afflicted had already been through the phases of Obama-mania — fainting at rallies, weeping over their touch screens while watching Obama videos, spending hours making folk crafts featuring Michelle Obama’s face. These patients had experienced intense surges of hope-amine, the brain chemical that fuels euphoric sensations of historic change and personal salvation.
But they found that as the weeks went on, they needed more and purer hope-injections just to preserve the rush. They wound up craving more hope than even the Hope Pope could provide, and they began experiencing brooding moments of suboptimal hopefulness. Anxious posts began to appear on the Yes We Can! Facebook pages. A sense of ennui began to creep through the nation’s Ian McEwan-centered book clubs.
Up until now The Chosen One’s speeches had seemed to them less like stretches of words and more like soul sensations that transcended time and space. But those in the grips of Obama Comedown Syndrome began to wonder if His stuff actually made sense. For example, His Hopeness tells rallies that we are the change we have been waiting for, but if we are the change we have been waiting for then why have we been waiting since we’ve been here all along?
Patients in the grip of O.C.S. rarely express doubts at first, but in a classic case of transference, many experience slivers of sympathy for Hillary Clinton. They see her campaign morosely traipsing from one depressed industrial area to another — The Sitting Shiva for America Tour. They see that her entire political strategy consists of waiting for primary states as boring as she is.
They feel for her. They feel guilty because the entire commentariat now treats her like Richard Nixon. Are liberal elites rationalizing their own betrayal of her? Is Hillary just another fading First Wife thrown away for the first available Trophy Messiah?
As the syndrome progresses, they begin to ask questions about The Presence himself:
Barack Obama vowed to abide by the public finance campaign-spending rules in the general election if his opponent did. But now he’s waffling on his promise. Why does he need to check with his campaign staff members when deciding whether to keep his word?
Obama says he is practicing a new kind of politics, but why has his PAC sloshed $698,000 to the campaigns of the superdelegates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics? Is giving Robert Byrd’s campaign $10,000 the kind of change we can believe in?
If he values independent thinking, why is his the most predictable liberal vote in the Senate? A People for the American Way computer program would cast the same votes for cheaper.
And should we be worried about Obama’s mountainous self-confidence?
These doubts lead O.C.S. sufferers down the path to the question that is the Unholy of the Unholies for Obama-maniacs: How exactly would all this unity he talks about come to pass?
How is a 47-year-old novice going to unify highly polarized 70-something committee chairs? What will happen if the nation’s 261,000 lobbyists don’t see the light, even after the laying on of hands? Does The Changemaker have the guts to take on the special interests in his own party — the trial lawyers, the teachers’ unions, the AARP?
The Gang of 14 created bipartisan unity on judges, but Obama sat it out. Kennedy and McCain created a bipartisan deal on immigration. Obama opted out of the parts that displeased the unions. Sixty-eight senators supported a bipartisan deal on FISA. Obama voted no. And if he were president now, how would the High Deacon of Unity heal the breach that split the House last week?
The victims of O.C.S. struggle against Obama-myopia, or the inability to see beyond Election Day. But here’s the fascinating thing: They still like him. They know that most of his hope-mongering is vaporous. They know that he knows it’s vaporous.
But the fact that they can share this dream still means something. After the magic fades and reality sets in, they still know something about his soul, and he knows something about theirs. They figure that any new president is going to face gigantic obstacles. At least this candidate seems likely to want to head in the right direction. Obama’s hype comes from exaggerating his powers and his virtues, not faking them.
Those afflicted with O.C.S. are no longer as moved by his perorations. The fever passes. But some invisible connection seems to persist.
David Brooks, for the NYT.
This gets better and better.
Now the Magic Man is making people faint. Supposedly…
Is this really necessary? What the hell is going on with this guy?
“Question: What made you interested in Obama?
Answer: I’m interested in the fact that he’s black. I feel the race issue in this country is more important than the feminist issue. I think that the importance to blacks would be tremendous. He’s an attractive man, he’s smart, he happens to be tremendously articulate. His position in the Democratic Party is more or less okay with me. And I think it would be important to American blacks if he became president.”
This is Philip Roth in an interview for the Der Spiegel.
What can we expect from the regular American voter if all our intellectuals are all delusional like this?
You see, I had this crazy idea that saying that you are interested in someone because of the color of his skin would make you a… racist.
So if Obama wins because he is black, the world should consider the US as a pretty racist country.
I know I will.
You got to be kidding. I can only imagine the level of idiocy this will get if this guy wins the nomination.
Truly pathetic.
Bob Dole sends letter to Rush Limbaugh on McCain
“Rush,
I have not seen you in a long time but I do hear you frequently and I know that you have serious reservations about Senator McCain. Not that many care but I have not been involved in the Republican Primary contest because Elizabeth, a good conservative, is running for reelection in North Carolina where Romney, McCain and Huckabee each enjoy considerable support.
I was the Republican Leader from January 1985 until I left the Senate voluntarily in June 1996. I worked closely with Senator McCain when he came to the Senate in 1987 until I departed. I cannot recall a single instance when he did not support the Party on critical votes.
(At my age, I cannot be entirely certain but here are a few key conservative examples:)
1. Consistent pro-life record
2. Strong advocate for strict constructionist judges (We were misled on the Souter nomination)
3. Supported voluntary school prayer
4. Supported Constitutional Amendment for a Balanced Budget (needed two-thirds and lost by one vote – 66-34)
5. Strong advocate for reducing spending and opposing pork barrel “ear marks” which has, I might add, angered some of his colleagues
6. Consistent on defending Second Amendment rights
7. Opposed “Hillary Care” which would have been devastating
8. Probably the Senate’s strongest advocate for strong national defense
9. Of course he has cast many votes since I left. I totally disagreed with the McCain-Feingold legislation. On immigration, Senator McCain was not in the Senate when Congress passed President Reagan’s immigration legislation which passed overwhelmingly. It granted amnesty to 2.7 million illegals. It was not much different than the 2007 McCain, Kennedy, Bush effort.
I disagree with his votes against the Bush tax cuts but I believe his pledge to make them permanent and I do not agree that Governor Romney ever suggested a timetable for troop withdrawals in Iraq.
McCain is a friend and I proudly wore his P.O.W. bracelet bearing his name while he was still a guest at the “Hanoi Hilton.” I believe our major candidates are mainstream conservatives and that our nominee will address our concerns by keeping taxes low, reducing corporate taxes, protecting and assisting the vulnerable, strengthening our traditional values, and above all, keeping America strong militarily, whatever the cost.
Whoever wins the Republican nomination will need your enthusiastic support. Two terms for the Clintons are enough.
Gob Bless America,
BOB DOLE
P.S. Rush, I just came across a document from the Senate Library which shows Presidential Support scores. Let me give you ratings for “Mr. Conservative” Senator Helms through 2002 (Helms retired in January 2003) and Senator McCain through 2004.” (see numbers on the FOX News article)
Their worst nightmare
I heard this one on the Dennis Miller radio show:
“Obama is Clinton’s worst nightmare: a black man who doesn’t need their help.”
Ouch.
—x—
This one comes from Andre in the comments:
“Most of the 261 earmarks with Clinton’s name on them went to New York counties and municipalities, universities and colleges, and charitable organizations.For the candidates still in the primary race, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) had 46 earmarks, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) had 10 earmarks, Kucinich had 9 earmarks and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had no earmarks, according to the CAGW. McCain has campaigned on having no earmarks during his time in Congress, and he has pledged to eliminate them if elected president.”
Recent Comments