Will the real Obama please stand up?
Or has he already?
In the comments section of my last post there was a telling exchange about Obama’s outward demeanor versus his true inner nature and agenda. This comment by “kamper’ was the one that started the ball rolling:
The reason the “Obama is a radical” meme has not taken hold with the electorate is that it is belied by their own simple observation of the man. He’s about the furthest thing from a ”˜radical’ in his demeanor. So this becomes a ”˜who you gonna believe, me or your own lyin eyes’ argument.
Some people thought kamper was trying to say that Obama really couldn’t be a radical because of that calm demeanor. But I had a different interpretation, which I offered here:
I saw [kamper’s comment] as an observation, and a correct one at that. Barack Obama does not act radical. That is exactly why he had been able to effectively deny his radical associations, his radical past, and arguably his radical plans for the future. If he “acted radical” he would never have gone as far as he has.
Shakespeare, who seems to have noticed a great deal about human nature, said something relevant in the play “Hamlet” (actually, he has the character Hamlet say it, in Act I Scene V):
…one may smile, and smile, and be a villain.
The next line (which I had forgotten until I looked it up for this post) is pretty risible: At least I’m sure it may be so in Denmark. We can be safely sure that the phenomenon is not limited to that country. It’s a universal one, I’m afraid.
This is why so much attention has been paid—at least by the blogosphere; certainly not by the MSM—to Obama’s actions and his record or lack thereof. This is why his thinness of achievement in almost every position he’s held, as well as his dirty dealings in previous elections, have gotten so much study. This is why his old radio interviews are seen as clues to his true intent, why his reinvention as a centrist is suspect when you look at his liberal past, and why his radical associations are even more important than they would be for someone with a more solid and clear history in the national spotlight. That is why his words to Joe the Plumber have been parsed so finely.
Because Obama began running for President before he accomplished much of anything in the US Senate, we must take into account all these small clues as to who he is and what he might intend. We cannot trust his words in this campaign, which in any case have been a constantly shifting group of proposals or an amorphous target of hope/change generalities.
The evidence in his past is sobering rather than reassuring. But people hope that Obama won’t be the radical all indications point to—and, if he should be elected, I’ll be one of those people hoping.
Tony Blankley speaks to this phenomenon and does not think the “sensible” Obama will emerge. He cautions:
But of course, throughout history when dangerous, radical men have offered themselves up for leadership, their moderate supporters have rationalized their early support by hoping that the dangerous man is really a sensible man like them and doesn’t believe some of those wild things he has said to his more fervent followers.
But as the campaign clock ticks down to its last days and hours, prudent people have to consider the possibility that beneath that easy manner and calming voice is the pulsating heart of a genuine man of the radical left.
It a frightening possibility. But just as frightening, in a way, is the fact that we have reached the point of nearly electing this man and we still don’t know. Say what you will about almost any other politician you can think of, Right or Left, there is no one else in prominent national life who has this character of essential unknowability and possible extremism.
That is just one more reason to avoid voting for Obama—unless, of course, you’re a far Leftist, and that sort of change is just what you’ve been hoping for all these years.
[ADDENDUM: Jules Crittenden finally succumbs to the lure of the shining Obama facade. And before you write Jules angry emails, let me mention that his article is tongue-in-cheek.]
Look everyone,
Take Obama at his word if you want.
Even though he went against his word in using public financing for his campaign.
Obama’s proposals (and record in voting in the Senate) are exactly the wrong prescription for this economy.
John McCain’s (whether he is charismatic and explains them well enough is irrelevant) is the exact RIGHT prescription for this economy.
This economy NEEDS:
1) Somebody who understands the subprime loan problems and how they originated. John McCain tried to overhaul this stuff in 2005 and 2006 and it was voted against by all Democrats including the Obama and Dodd who were the highest contributed to by Freddie and Fannie. A vote for Obama is to deny the ‘affordable’ housing subprime policies that got this country in this mess
2) Somebody who understands that capital flight and stock devaluing is costing this country dearly. John McCain’s proposal to lower capital gains taxes would bring back investment and stock value to your 401K and bring back the movement of capital and investment in property and equipment for business. That would bring jobs. Obama’s plan to keep capital gains tax rates high COSTS jobs.
3) Somebody who understands that raising tax rates for ANY group of people leading into a recession would exacerbate the recession and drive unemployment up and dependency on the government up. When people are dependent on the government – spending has to rise as the government provides for those people. As John McCain asked in the last debate which he won, “Why would you raise taxes on anyone at this time?”
4) Somebody who has the background and the international experience to lead us into this next few years where the world is a dangerous place and evil does exist. John McCain has visited more countries and visited with more foreign leaders in his career and understands the culture and political climate in so many countries than Obama has in his little pinky. Obama’s world tour a few months ago should’ve been seen for what it was – a showing of what LITTLE international experience he has.
We cannot reward journalism’s death. We need to stand up and show the country that the tactics they have employed WILL BE REPUDIATED.
I think everyone (men and women) should stand up and not reward the absolute failure of journalists to:
1) read economics books
2) be decent human beings
3) be negligent in doing the due diligence required before reporting things that arent’ true
4) apply the same standard to John and Sarah (especially Sarah)
I’ve been paying attention to politics astutely since 1990. I had an huge core belief change from liberalism in 1991 after visiting the library 3 times a week for a full year during college classes and being exposed to an alternative point of view.
What has happened to journalism this year has been a travesty. It can be regarded as dead.
“Look out kids
They keep it all hid…”
The hope that I cling to is that Obama is just a cynical opportunist who is lying to his supporters. We’ll be safe if he’s just an amoral crook who has race-hustled his way into the most powerful office in the world and will proceed to dig into the treasury with both hands up to the elbows. We can survive that.
If he’s sincere, millions of people are going to die.
The hope that I cling to is that Obama is just a cynical opportunist who is lying to his supporters.
Sorry, the man is an unrepentent Marxist, and a True Believer. He’s just a tad more restrained and not nearly as bellicose in his tenor.
Yet.
“The weirder you’re going to behave, the more normal you should look.”
-P. J. O’Rourke
Ayers grew up and realized that bombthrowing was counterproductive. He had a better chance to get his radical agenda in place by using the system. Could Obama have a better example than his old mentor? He taught Obama well.
Saul Alinsky, author of the book “Rules for Radicals” would be proud of Obama’s chameleon capabilities.
Quote from his book….
“”As an organizer I start from where the world is, as it is, not as I would like it to be. That we accept the world as it is does not in any sense weaken our desire to change it into what we believe it should be – it is necessary to begin where the world is if we are going to change it to what we think it should be. That means working in the system. (Alinsky 1972: xix).
Baklava,
What you said. Right on!
Go watch this video and discover what a bunch of bright, well-informed supporters Obama has.
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=194983
Aaaaarrrghhh!! Enough to make one want to call for voter qualification tests.
“The One” isn’t going to be swept into office by “far leftists” (of course he’ll get a huge assist, if not actually pushed over the top, by the far leftists Acorn voter fraud activity the illegal credit card contributions, etc.).
But of the millions upon millions who vote for this disaster, the HUGE ENORMOUS and vast majority of them are going to be well meaning, uncomplicated souls, who are not particularly educated; who don’t follow politics very much; who never read political blogs; what little daily news they do glean comes from short pops of CNN or CBS or ABC or NBC.
They latch on to “sound bites,” and vote based on their emotions.
Like your typical jurors in a jury trial.
And they have been oblivious to all the non-stop, 24/7 propaganda that has been pounded into their heads. For example, they see Sarah get mocked and ridiculed on the comedy channels and late night talk shows and SNL…and they see biased edited snippets of her stumbling through a hostile interview filled with questions a Dem would never get challenged with…and so I overhear my secretaries say…”she doesn’t seem too smart, does she”…..(and they haven’t been exposed to Biden AT ALL!)……and then… “Now Obama, HE just SEEMS so calm and smart, and you know – we need a change from Bush, and people say McCain is a lot like Bush.” (without even realizing where they have been hearing that……over and over and over and over again)
They do not understand what “Socialism” or “Marxism” even is – just that it has always sounded kind of icky – wasn’t that back, like, in you know, Russia or whatever?? – “But, then Ed from the loading dock was talking to Lois, our receptionist the other day, and he really follows this politics stuff you know… and HE was sayin, ‘if someone is in the Army that’s socialism, and so is the Post Office, so this is just some McCain thing to scare people about Obama’, and so, you know, like, I don’t see what is so bad about 95% of us getting a tax cut – hardly anybody makes over $250,000 anyhow and they can afford it. And anyway, we need a change and we need to end that war, and who wants more of Bush anyway! This economy is all his fault, right? And I’ve heard that McCain is just like Bush, and that Sarah – she’s kind of scary because she just doesn’t seem too smart – and my cousin Dan said she thinks Dinosaurs walked on the earth with humans!! Can you believe it?!!”
It is really that simplistic and basic. People on sites like THIS, think deeply and thoughtfully……But “The One” is going to get tens of millions of votes from perfectly nice ignoramuses like my two secretaries, or the guy who bags your groceries, or changes your oil, whose political discussions are at about the level I just illustrated above.
I’m not saying most of the voters on the other side are not the exact same way. I’m saying, you have to appeal to simplistic gut emotions.
So I hate to say this. And I hate to see it. But I think McCain’s ONLY chance is to go on an all out character attack on Obama with the Bill Ayers, Marxist, LA Times hiding the anti-Jew PLO tape, Reverand Wright hates America, etc., stuff, to essentlially get into the faces of the kind and simple souls who mean well but who just are not paying attention – to get them UNCOMFORTABLE with the idea of Obama in the White House.
Yes that will be branded as Racist. But ANY attacks on “The One” will be branded that way, anyway. So its time to go all out. And save this country.
Without a Democratic Party majority in the Congress, Obama would just be another Jimmy Carter–a mediocre president who caused financial hardship and low morale.
With a huge majority in Congress, Obama can pack the Federal Court system for decades. He can pass reams of legislation that will sit in the halls of bureaucracy and spit out shrapnel into the economy and social sphere long after Obama and his cadre are dead and gone.
The damage of an Obama presidency without checks and balances will be incalculable and virtually permanent. The rest of the world will be all the worse, for losing an America under the rule of law.
Judith Apter Klinghoffer
OBAMA ON HOW TO TALK TO WHITE PEOPLE
In the good, old tradition of revolutionaries, Obama hides in plain print. So, before listening to his speech, it’s worth while to note the following passages from his autobiography:
On p. 94-95 he describes an effective tactic to deal with White people:
“It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied; they were relieved – such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”
Indeed, when he was a community organizer (age 22 prior to going to law school) he happily cooperated with Rafiq, a former gangster turned Nation of Islam. He even believed that Black Nationalism was a good therapy for Blacks. That was also the reason he supported Wright(p. 190-200. For he shares Michelle’s sentiments of alienation, came to believe that race should trump everything and it should be anti-white:
” . . . :all the black people who, it turned out, shared with me a voice that whispered inside them – “You don’t really belong here.”
” In a sense, then, Rafiq was right when he insisted that, deep down, all blacks were potential Nationalists. The anger was there, bottled up and often turned inward. And . . . I wondered whether, for now at least, Rafiq wasn’t also right in preferring that that anger be redirected; whether a black politics that suppressed rage towards white generally, or one that failed to elevate race loyally above all else, was a politics inadequate to the task.
“It was a painful thought to consider, as painful now as it has been years ago. it contradicted the morality my mother had taught me, a morality of subtle distinctions- between individuals of goodwill and those who wished me ill, between active malice and ignorance of indifference. I has a personal stake in that moral framework; I’d discovered that I couldn’t escape it if I tried.
“And yet perhaps it was a framework that blacks in this country could no longer afford; perhaps it weakened black resolve, encouraged confusion within the ranks. Desperate times called for desperate measures, and for many blacks, times were chronically desperate. If nationalism could create a strong and effective insularity, deliver on its promise of self respect, then the hurt it might cause well-meaning whites, of the inner turmoil it caused people like me, would be of little consequence.
“If nationalism could deliver. As it turned out, questions of effectiveness, and not sentiment, cause most of my quarrels with Rafiq.”
Jimmy,
Thanks! I can’t watch the vid where I’m at but I appreciate the Right on.
I think the press’s tactics were on vivid display. I think the tactics will be repudiated by many Americans.
I remember before I was “informed” and I went on “feelings”, i wanted Paul Tsongas back in 1990. But that didn’t translate to a vote. “Feeling” people tend to vote in less numbers.
See this article:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/33494194.html
neo,
Well said.
When Barack says
the subtext is
this is better:
Thomas Sowell:
Over on hotair.com the discussion of relaxed fraud controls on Obama’s contribution machine continues. One article makes the case that this is the perfect place for a crook to test out a stolen card number, and that other kinds of fraud are possible.
If hundreds of thousands of people find that their cards have been compromised, and if half of them are Democrats, will that affect the Messiah’s reputation, or is the Kool-Aid already in the bloodstream?
To me Obama is a a cross between Chauncey Gardiner (Chance the Gardener) from “Being There” (by Jersey Kosinski) and Bartleby the Scrivner (by Herman Melville). While I know the people here probably already understand I will indulge myself in an explanation.
Chance (Chauncey) because he what he says on the campaign is continually interpreted to be of great intelligence by those who long for direction – someone to tell them what to do – when in fact there is little substance there.
And Bartleby because any time anyone has asked him (or Biden and other campaign surrogates) any kind of relevant question they don’t want to deal with they just launch into the “talking points” which I translate to “I would prefer not to”.
And for those that watched the Stern video linked in Jimmy J’s comment you might wish to follow it up with reading this
http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnStossel/2008/10/29/a_duty_not_to_vote
‘Gender Alone Is Not Enough’
Baklava: I supported Tsongas in 1992. I still like what I know about him. “Feelings” were that he was a good guy—but he was also a smart guy and a moral guy and a moderate guy. A very unusual personality to have gone into politics.
Neo,
I agree. I’m sorry if I was unclear. Never did I have a bad opinion of him.
Paul was clear. He wasn’t about pandering. He was honest.
And…
He said things to Democrats and Republicans (all Americans) that they didn’t want to hear. I liked what he had to say though.
Here’s a jaw-dropping video, Sorry I’m Late, of Obama apologizing over and over again for being late to Senate meetings before his campaign began.
Whoever else Obama may be, a conscientious senator he is not. Most places I’ve worked a junior employee would be fired for chronic tardiness.
Truth,
I read a lot. I saw no value in what you linked. Was there a reason in your mind that you shared?
Honestly inquiring…
This video applies, FF to about 41 seconds to avoid the lead in credits:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU634Sj2-2k&feature=channel
This election better be about race. If, according to MSM, 90% of the blacks (who may even have voted for W in ’04) are going to vote for Obama, then it is obvious, they are voting because of his race. Then there is nothing morally wrong in Whites voting for McCain – may be because of his race.
And if this election is about “Change”, Mass. GOP made a big mistake not fielding enough candidates to oppose the inept congressmen. If the “Change” is what we desire, then lets throw the bums out – especially Barney Frank.
Stan,
ayers is his own antithesis… the reason for revolution is the system cant be reformed… stopping bombing and using the system to reform and being successful at it means he disproved his revolutionary thesis.
Despite the apparent symmetry, it is moral to vote for Obama just because he is black while it is immoral to vote for McCain just because he is white. That’s because when someone from a distinguished group is about to achieve something that someone from that group hasn’t done before, and especially when that group has been deliberately disadvantaged, it’s good and noble to help advance that accomplishment, and immoral to act to retard it.
and especially when that group has been deliberately disadvantaged, it’s good and noble to help advance that accomplishment, and immoral to act to retard it.
Hahaha! That’s funny! I’ll bet the dippy liberals actually think like that!
As if two wrongs make a right….
Neoneocon,
Since you are surrounded by liberals would you please infrom us of their attitute? Are your friends really ignorant, or do they also hate this country so much that they want to see it destroyed?
My take is that the megawealthy believe that they will be able to use class envy between the middle class and the lower class to destroy them. Then the megawealthy will have unlimited power in a totalitarian society.
Please let me know what your take is?
The real Obama will stand up starting in January. I find that to be rather depressing, given what I know him to be and what Pelosi wants.
I did the due diligence that my vote requires. It isn’t my fault that over half the nation was stuck on stupid. I am especially disappointed in two demographics: the college age crowd and single, white females. They want socialism, and get it they shall.
Cork the negativity Fred
It’s not helpful.
I implore you to work/fight/pursuade. 🙂
SouthernJames,
You are absolutely right in your analysis. And yet the demographics of Obama polling data suggest rather strongly that his strongest support is from the 18-30 year old group and from SINGLE, WHITE FEMALES.
Very strong support for Obama among college students. While they may be intellectually immature, they aren’t stupid, although the quality of their education may be in doubt.
baklava,
I tried real hard to talk to my parents about this (they’re voting for Obonga). They won’t listen. All but one of my five siblings are voting for McCain (thank God). If anyone shows a genuinely open mind, I might talk to him or her. But I go about it carefully, so that they won’t think I’m one of those stereotyped “right wingers” that drink human blood.
My parents are voting for McCain.
Some people don’t listen. It’s the hardest thing to do is listen to others and put yourself in their shoes. That quality ALONE makes you a better spouse and partner. Two people with that quality can be a great couple.
Other people will listen. My best friend is an African American who I converted to a Republican with a persuasive and heartfelt discussion when we were setting up some servers in San Fransisco together for 9 hours. It was one of my proudest moments to hear that from him.
He is voting for McCain.
One of the ways to work with people is to stay away from “personalities” and talk about philosophy and issues. People hear common sense and can agree with it. It’s better to teach a man to fish than give him fish… etc.
Personalities will dissappoint. It wasn’t about Bush. It’s not about John or Sarah. It is about:
1) fairness
2) what will a tax increase do
3) national security and what the constitution prescribes the federal government should do (protect)
4) any issue you bring up you can see that more government has brought problems. The answer isn’t more government. College tuition is high because of government. Health care is costly because of government and trial lawyers. Energy is expensive because of government.
I go about this carefully too. I work in the belly of the beast for CA state government providing IT services. I’ve been in computers for 20 years and for the last 7 for CA. I have to work hard and walk past state employees who play solitaire almost all day. If I rub somebody wrong I don’t have the union protecting me but the state employee does.
Yes, I have to go about it carefully. Those who know me look at me as “different” than most Republicans because they think I have a heart and that I ‘care’. But i politely remind them that they know me but do not know others who are demonized.
Baklava,
I have a niece who is a veterinarian and a brilliant gal. She graduated five years ago from U Tennessee at Knoxville and recently worked at a clinic in Fort Lauderdale, FL. She tried to get a job up here in NH-MA, but somehow never got an offer. Now, she’s employed at UC Davis doing research at the veterinarian school there. Like her father and her mother (my sister) she is conservative, but has to lie low out there, so as not to make a target of herself. Her dad made her quite aware of how to avoid being a target in moombat havens. She’s quite aware of the pc atmosphere, as she went to college in the Nineties when it was really hitting full stride in academia.
It must really piss you off to watch state employees playing on the taxpayer dime. Well, from afar it sure does look like California is one f****d up mess, fiscally and otherwise. The Governator sure has caved in. I fear that what we see in California is going to be writ large on the nation in the coming few years.
Sometimes you have to wonder how it all got so out of hand.
FredHJR,
If you are tracking the polls, then you should read the blogs by DJ Drummond (he writes at Wizbang). He has several analyses of current polls and believes that the polls are absolutely unpredictive in this election. His reasoning is cogent and his evidence appears sound.
As for myself, I have seen an incredible amount of anecdotal evidence that, by itself, doesn’t mean much, but when taken as a whole also repudiates the Obama fait accompli.
For my take, I say McCain with 286 or 288 electoral votes (depending on New Hampshire); I actually expect McCain/Palin to take my home state of PA. Now we get to see just how close this prediction is.
T Says,
Since I live in New Hampshire, my read of my own state is that it has DRAMATICALLY changed during the last two decades. It is no longer a Republican state. It is very much a Blue State, at all levels. The Republican Party is shrinking and collapsing here. I am not sure why this has happened. I would love to find out why it has happened and anyone who has written or researched anything about it I would dearly love a link to.
My hope is that Pennsylvania will repudiate both Obama and Murtha. I am really hoping that McCain can win Pennsylvania. I think that state is the key to it all.
T, I agree, I remember 2004, Kerry had it all sewn up at this time back then according to all the polls IBD was the only one that was close.
The Menace Says:
“Since you are surrounded by liberals would you please infrom us of their attitute? Are your friends really ignorant, or do they also hate this country so much that they want to see it destroyed?”
I am too. I’ve noticed a couple things. One, a lot of people just want to see him as a JFK lib.. and your nuts for thinking he is not.
Also, there are some younger people who grew up in the Bush bashing moveon era… who just don’t think income redistribution is bad and just buy the far left stuff. They don’t see it as extreme. We are… for not buying it…
Since you are surrounded by liberals would you please infrom us of their attitute? Are your friends really ignorant, or do they also hate this country so much that they want to see it destroyed?
You didn’t ask me, but I have to associate with some activist Libs recurrently, and the answer in my experience is, “Both”, except that maybe these Libs just want to see America almost destroyed. Fwiw, some anecdotes:
Once when I was trying to establish some common ground with one Lib woman, she denied out of hand that OBL had ever declared war on America, without daring to ask me why I thought he had. Stunned, I let it drop, thinking that perhaps she would realize just how inadequate her position was. Wrong.
Because about six weeks later, having returned from her cult haven in L.A., she simply announced to me out of the blue that “OBL has never declared war on America”, again without asking me for any evidence that he had. The discussion was not intended to go any further than her assertion – she was retreating quickly into the bathroom as she spoke – so again I let it drop, except for saying, “Yes he has.”
Why pursue it if the person so resolutely won’t even ask about why I have my particular opinion? I guess she thought repeating hers enough times, or getting the last word, would make it come true?
Three Libs had me trapped at dinner once – where this kind of thing should have never occurred among adults, given the circumstances. I’m sure everyone has had these general kind of unpleasant experiences where someone knows you are not going to be able or want to just get up and walk away.
One guy started out immediately with, ~ “I love my country, but I can’t stand the American lifestyle”, also referring to “imperialst America”.
Without getting into exactly what he meant by “the American lifestyle”, I simply retorted, “That’s subjective”, and he agreed. But the America hate and inveterate rapid fire disparaging of America went on: we covered the “trade deficit”, “rising Canadian dollar”, military stationed all over the World, “airport security checks”, Islamos hate us because we’ve had bases on “their” land, blah, blah, blah. They didn’t get anywhere at all, imo. I was ready with one-liners.
But this guy’s comment criticizing the American lifestyle was really strange because at the time we were all sitting in a wonderful log house on 200 very isolated acres virtually surrounded by Wilderness, which all the Libs either part-own or have free access to – mostly thanks to me, an evil neocon, I might add. I guess he didn’t like this lifestyle, either, or else he just didn’t know where he was.
I didn’t bother going into what he meant by “imperialism”, again due to the circumstances. Mainly, I just wanted to eat and have a good time. But the assault continued, complete with references to mysterious, very suspicious area in Montana involving an evil government installation, or something. I parried most of the attacks effectively with one-liners, but the attack on America, especially “Bush’s”, was persistent.
Lord help us, such people obviously have “issues”.
Several times I’ve had the pleasure of experiencing those “significant silences” – when you say something quite simple and it is as if you haven’t said anything at all, when everyone knows you have. It always involves something undeniable which the Libs simply can’t handle, even something as bland as, “Well, they reelected Ray Nagin in New Orelans.”
Dead silence, my friends, when a year or so earlier, it had all been about the “classism” – code for racism – involved in the gov’t response to Katrina. I had asked them at that time if they thought Nagin himself was in on the “classism”, and Blanco. Mission Accomplished!
Anyway, I could go on and on about the dedicatedly closed-minded ingorance of these kind of Libs, their groupthink, paranoia, and their problems with “America”. It’s truely amazing to experience firsthand.
For the most part they simply don’t want to hear anything except propaganda memes, and there’s obviously a big lack of “critical thinking” going on. Plus America is just a really baaaad place. Imo, they’re mostly talking about themselves, not America.
The Left views Bush the way we view AQ and dictators like Saddam. The Left views Sarah Palin the way we view Obama. An extremist and dangerous person too close to the Presidency.
The reality, however, is just a bit too ironic.
T, FredHjr:
I live in Pennsylvania, and I’m likewise hoping McCain can win this state. I’ve been growing increasingly optimistic in the last few days. And Murtha seems to have a real race on his hands.
Yet Pennsylvania also seems to be trending Democrat for the last 20 years or so. It’s not only the urban areas; it’s spreading into the suburban counties as well. It’s like some sort of infectious disease. I assume it probably has to do with the left-dominated educational system.
Pretty much all of my peers that I grew up with are still liberal Democrats. I’m not sure why I managed to escape. Reading, talk radio, and blogs have helped me. Most of the others still rely on Old Media for their information and sometimes it seems like I’m talking to someone from another world. I’ve drifted apart from most of them.
There’s one friend in particular who is a fan of Jon Stewart and Bill Maher. When I try to argue using facts and principles, he simply retorts with jokes he heard on those shows. I don’t seem to be able to get anywhere with him. He’s OK to hang out with as long as we don’t talk politics.
If bambi is elected, and the dims succeed in slashing the military, appeasing enemies like Hugo Chavez, etc., as well as significantly raising taxes and using the money to fund U.N. leftist/islamist associated agendas; But most significantly they undertake the formation of a civilian security apparatus, as has lately been exposed, there will be a backlash against bambi and the dimocrats in this country which will make the last eight years of the Bush hater syndrome pale by comparison, it’s gaining momentum every day closer to the election deadline. They can only take over and undermine for awhile, they can’t repeal the constitution…
When my wife and I watched this morning TV coverage of USA election in Euronews, she commented Obama’s appearance in pseudo-White House decorations, with a flag on backgound: Agitprop. And McCain’s appearance on the meeting: A strong Lutheran mold. I said: He is a Scott, not German. And she replied: I see my father’s eyes. He can gone berserk when sees dishonesty or injustice, but he never falter in his convictions and principles. How people can be so stupid not to tell obvious fake from obvious true?
And I replied: They do not have our experience. They never were exposed to such massive and arrogantly dishonest propaganda campaign. And very few were reared in genuine Lutheran families with undiluted 19 century traditions and principles.
Thank-you for the answers.
I don’t want to cause any distress here, but is this a spiritual problem? Sergey points out that the Lutherans have a culture that promotes honesty and independence.
Are the liberals spiritually empty people who are trying to fill the void with their Marxism? Do they hate Bush because he mentioned he was a Christian at one time? Do they hate McCain and Palin because they are both Christians? Do they love Osama because he is working against Christians and Jews?
I’m sure there are secularists on our side, and I don’t intend to insult any of you if there are some here, but folks like Hitchens who have turned against Sara Palin in a openly vicious manner because she is a Christian is disturbing. Are we now witnessing the first phase of a religious war? In Cuba, Christian pastors have been imprisoned and tortured because of their faith. Can it happen here?
What are you worrying about?
Since the Republican campaign began to falter a couple of weeks ago, I’ve noticed a common thread in conversations up here in Canada. People are stunned that Americans are actually about to elect a black President. And I think the reason it’s stunning is that everybody pretty much senses that your culture’s not ready.
To many (tens of thousands? hundreds of thousands?) of thoughtless Americans, Obama’s genuinely anti American: he’s a muslim, a socialist, a terrorist, a smooth-talking, dangerous, lying nigger. He’s not better than them. This isn’t a guilty-by-association argument. I’m just adding the vile noun to make the point that you can up the ante on the anger you’re feeling, the “I sometimes wish for civil war” sentiment I’ve (alarmingly) read in this very community and in other conservative forums on the net. Really up it.
So in a sense you’re wasting your time wringing your hands over an agenda that won’t be carried out. Your nation has more than enough guns and white power rednecks to ensure that Obama won’t live longer than four months as your President.
A better use of your time would be considering how to deal with the impact of the far more likely scenario of Obama’s assassination, and the resulting, impossible to counter, Kennedy-esque legacy of What Might Have Been.
.
Toes:
Ah, there it is.
“You don’t like Obama because you are racist” bit is getting really damn old. No one can discuss the man’s policies because it gets immediately shut down with this crap.
The “Obama will be made a martyr because of your evil racists ways” bit is rather disturbing.
Wtf is it with assassination fantasies, is it some sort of Obama = Jesus religious cult thing?
I’ve seen it mentioned by lefties a bunch of times, & frankly it freaks me out for Obama.
The lefties are setting him up as the messiah, and when he doesn’t fulfill their dreams I think it more likely the man might get attacked by a disgruntled former believer — what was it Joe Biden said about Obama being “tested” and how “you might not like his response” but we “need to stand with him?”
Mind you, Biden was speaking to a room full of Obama supporters!
So why does Joe think think Lefties will turn on the Obama/Messiah? Like poor Jesus, alone in the garden…
rickl,
Find Jay Cost on Realclearpolitics, he did a state by state analysis of swing states including PA. He pointed out that the eastern (PA-NJ border) counties have become bluer as the result of becoming NYC bedroom communities while the western part of the state has become redder.
This cycle, the CBS Biden flap on Phil Channel 3 must have softened independent support for BHO even if only a little;l likewise the Phila Inquirer op-ed over the weekend which seriously recommended disenfranchising white citizens because they have “abused” the vote.
Remember that BHO lost PA to Clinton by almost 10 points, and word has it that the PA dem machine has just not turned out for BHO because it HAS been a Clinton state.
Regardless of whether Murtha wins, I think he has lost Western PA for Obama with his Haditha-racist-redneck slurs of his own constituency.
Remember also, that PA was Blue in 2004, but that may well have been anti-Bush sentiment. If so, that doesnt neceaasrily translate into anti-McCain; and with over one million registered hunters in this state, many who also “cling to their religion,” they are sympathetic to the likes of Sarah Palin.
I think BHO will take Phila and 2 or 3 surrounding counties and Center County (Penn State Univ), but not nearly with the majority he needs to offset voting from the remainder of the state. In the past, the Eastern (Phila) and western PA vote have determined the state, but this election, I think Phila will have to stand on its own.
One can only hope.
Toes:
“People are stunned that Americans are actually about to elect a black President. And I think the reason it’s stunning is that everybody pretty much senses that your culture’s not ready.”
And the number of black Canadian presidential candidates to date is?
Coming off as smug and condescendingly more morally enlightened than we “thoughtless Americans” while spewing spittle does not impress. You might want to examine the irony.
Uh-huh, the only American blogs/forums I read are conservative (more interesting than lefty blogs), so if the lefties are raising the scenario it’s news to me. But I’m not surprised.
An assassination scenario is just that, a scenario, and it’d be ‘fantasy’ only if political assassinations weren’t commonplace. Shall I list them for you?
Your belief that it’s ‘more likely’ that a disgruntled lefty would assassinate Obama than a white supremacist is just so much empty posturing. Get real.
Toes is one of the reasons I don’t go to Canada anymore; a pc pompous bigot. Canada is what Obama thinks we should be. Think of it: By law, every red octagonal STOP sign also has the word in French on the lower half. How stupid the Quebecois must be, and how so very virtuous the Anglophones are not simply to laugh at them.
Neo, Tsongas did rather misrepresent his pre-candidacy lymphoma, insisting he’d been cured. But he relapsed shortly after his campaign, as I recall, and died several years later.
So, how many “Toes”?
Harry, there will never be a black Canadian presidential candidate. We elect a Prime Minister.
Perhaps somebody could address the substance of the post rather than attack the credibility of its author. But I understand if you’d rather not touch the topic.
Toes:
I am well aware of the political assassinations that have occurred through the years.
I was being sarcastic with my disgruntled lefty kills the Obama/Messiah bit. Well half sarcastic –there be some crazies in the world.
Shall we discuss some other assassination fantasies?
Why don’t we start with all the ones lefties spewed about the current President — Bush.
Toes, Im sorry but I feel that it is you rather than I who will not address the substance of an argument.
If it will make you happy to parse words, we’ll play it your way:
And the number of black Canadian Prime Minister candidates to date is?
Remember, it was your assertion that we “thoughtless” Americans were some how less enlightened and unready to vote for a black.
I want to know how it is you are able to pretend to be so much more sophisticated than we are.
Toes:
Yes, yes. Back on topic. Where were we?
Ah —
“How dare you disagree with Obama/messiah!
The only ONLY reason you evil racists Americans don’t like him is because you are evil and racist!!
How can you disagree with his policies, because they are PERFECT!!
That proves the only reason you don’t want him is that you are RACISTS!!
Not like Canada!!
Where right now, all is rainbows and unicorns!! ”
Have I summed up all your talking points about right?
Toes said:
“Since the Republican campaign began to falter a couple of weeks ago, I’ve noticed a common thread in conversations up here in Canada. People are stunned that Americans are actually about to elect a black President. And I think the reason it’s stunning is that everybody pretty much senses that your culture’s not ready.”
Mr Toes:
You appear to be the type of empty person I’m talking about. When people don’t have a moral center they become destructive. Because you have no political freedom in Canada your culture is trash.
Your own people have given up their freedom to a group of politicians. Just recently we were treated to a newspaper man hauled before one of your kangaroo courts for thought crimes because he criticized Muslims. A year or two ago your kangaroo courts prosecuted a Christian pastor who stated the truth, that Islam is intolerant. Unless you change, your country and your culture have no future.
You claim that we are imagining Mr. Obama’s radical ties. That is not our imagination, it is true. I e-mailed my Democratic senator and asked him if he wanted to slap government controls on the press. He said yes. Of course he was refering exclusively to talk radio since they don’t agree with the Democrats.
Tom: Tsongas did not die from a relapse of his lymphoma. He died of complications from the treatment he’d had for lymphoma earlier. It is often reported that he died from a cancer recurrence, but that is an error (see this as well. And here is an article explaining in greater depth).
Toes wrote, “People are stunned that Americans are actually about to elect a black President. ”
That says more about Canadians than us. This is a 50/50 country (liberals/conservatives) and that number is no different whether Barack is black or not. You guys should re-evaluate your own beliefs and who feeds into those beliefs (your media).
Your hatred shines through and instead of debating issues you bring in personalities that aren’t John or Sarah or even Barack. Assassination talk is only inflammatory. There were criminals who were trying to carry out Bush’s and Clinton’s assassination. Remember? Or did your media not feed you that?
BTW, Kerry and Gore lost even though polling had them ahead. It should not cement your idea that we are racist if polling is off again.
Toes is stunned because he knows next to nothing about this country. It’s Canada that would never have a major black candidate. He’s mixing the two places up again.
Pingback:Jules Crittenden » Why I’m Voting For Obama
An inspiration for a neo post! Now I’ve really hit the big time. Where do I collect my check?
(Of course, neo has come to the exact opposite conclusion than I did, but that’s nitpicking.)
Autographed copies of my original comment available for a small fee. Serious inquiries only!
I wish to address Mr. Toes charge that Americans are racists.
I don’t think Mr. Toes even knows what racism is. When I was a child I lived in the heart of Africa in a little country called Rwanda. For a time, my friends were all Africans.
There were two major tribes, Tutsis and Hutus. The government made people register according to their tribal affiliation just like Americans now do. Their world was divided into two halves, the Tutsis and the Hutus. The government forced people to keep track of their tribe, even when they intermarried.
Shortly before we left the Hutus began killing Tutsis. Can anyone say genocide? Now Mr. Toes, if one of you lilly white Canadians went to Africa you would probably call them all “niggers” like you did on this web sited, but believe me, they knew exactly who they were. Although I was an American, my playmates asked me which tribe I belonged to.
So Mr. Toes. Were my black playmates racists? Is it possible to commit genocide without factoring in race?
Lets talk some more about Africa. According to reports I’ve read, recently Mr. Obama contacted some of his relatives in Kenya and stirred up violence between the tribes there. A number of Africans were murdered in the fighting and the country was greatly damaged. By siding with his tribe, Mr. Obama was possibly setting Kenya up for the same genocide we experienced in Rwanda. So is a man who stirs up violence between tribes racist?
What is racism?
Re. this talk about assassination…
First of all, the Left has never come clean with an admission that the man who killed JFK was a Communist and had ties to the Castro regime. They just can’t bring themselves to it.
I don’t know of any conservatives or Republicans like me who are calling for a President Obama to be assassinated. It’s just crazy talk. I was participating in a blog discussion about this elsewhere AND ALL OF US OPPONENTS OF OBAMA said if we did have knowledge about a plot to kill Pres. Obama WE WOULD INFORM THE SECRET SERVICE. We may not like Obama and we certainly do think he would do great harm to the country and its allies, but we just don’t believe in political assassination. If there are people on the Left who think we are the opposite of that, well, we are not responsible for the defects of their minds.
But I will tell you what we DO believe. If he did something very serious to the Constitution or was derelict in his duty to it or to protect the people as Commander in Chief, we would not be above the idea of arresting the President, his cabinet, and his party’s leadership. Last I checked in our founding documents, in the Federalist Papers, and in Jefferson’s own writings, the idea of overthrowing the government is not out of the question and certainly not an illegitimate thing.
The Menace Says:
“In Cuba, Christian pastors have been imprisoned and tortured because of their faith. Can it happen here?”
Well, I think you’re on the right track (it is a spiritual problem of sorts) but I don’t think it can happen here… We tend to be the people that still value self defense. I want my children taking martial arts classes and learning to shoot et cetera… sooo, it would really really be hard to actually attack us as an out group… Plus the military leans our way and the police tend to be split (unlike some other areas of work like say law professors)… so they’d be ineffective…
One of the European Jew’s big problems was they were not armed or prepared for self defense… While we tend to be much better than average in those departments…
Toes, btw conservatives by and large believe in the rule of law. Pointing to individuals who don’t does not make us feel guilty because WE are clean.
Projecting onto us doesn’t do anything but display your inaccurate views.
kamper The same statement could’ve been said about Bill Clinton. A lot of people were ‘duped’. His rhetoric didn’t match his way of governing. Additionally, he mischaracterized conservative positions in EVERY speech he gave (exactly like Obama does).
Let conservatives define how they:
1) care
2) want to teach a man to fish rather than give fish (which incidentally is born of love
3) want to lower costs of health care, college tuition, energy prices
4) want to benefit everyone by having good sound economic policy.
Let us define ourselves and debate the issues – learn the issues. Stop misdefining us and projecting onto us.
There is empirical evidence and a ton of statistics that PROVE behind a reasonable doubt that raising taxes on any income group has a negative effect on employment and jobs and why would you do that going into a recession.
That is neither fair – nor wise – and is born of a lack of economic knowledge and inexperience.
For the first time that I am aware of, the word “socialism” has cracked the top ten search items on Yahoo. Obama is number 6. It is 1:04 P.M. eastern time 10/30/08.
Maybe Obama and his infomercials are getting through to people. Just not in the way he anticipated.
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/10/30/explaining-redistributive-economics.php
🙂
http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/10/29/coffee-talk-with-lady-lynn/
Fundraiser for Hillary is 100% for McCain.
Obama has all the calm demeanor of Uncle Ho.
(and for you youngun’s, Ho is an actual name).
Baklava,
I seem to remember Bush running as a Compassionate Conservative.
How’d that work out?
As I’ve always said, “Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Give a man a Filet O Fish, feed him deliciously for a day.”
kamper, you might be interested in this: ‘You’ll think I’m off my trolley, but Bush has the most positive approach to Africa since Kennedy’ : Geldof, back in Ethiopia, praises Bush
kamper asks, “I seem to remember Bush running as a Compassionate Conservative.
How’d that work out? ”
It got him derision and absolute lack of respect from the left.
EVERY domestic program had large increases in spending. Veterans, Health, Education, etc. He even got passed a new program (Prescription Drugs).
Leftist leaders lied (yes lied) about cuts and acted like Bush doesn’t ‘care’. But it was nothing new. Leftists in this country have done this for decades.
Clinton and leftist leaders and journalists (killing journalism) did this throughout the Clinton years.
With Bills proposed by the Republican controlled Congress that called for 7% increases in Medicare per year for 7 years (more than 49% compounded) Clinton and deadbeat journalists called it a 270 Billion dollar cut. He and they did that with the school lunch program when that was supposed to be a block grant and increase of 4.5% per year to the states.
Leftists lie on the facts on almost every issue. Leftist rank-and-file folks are duped. Like you for instance. Like I WAS FOR INSTANCE. Until I went to the library 3 times a week for a full year in 1991 did I wake up and smell the roses.
The leadership of the Democrat party do not want dissent. Do not like alternative viewpoints being aired and hate that the facts get printed. Their power is dependent on the likes of ACORN, Rock the Vote, feel good speeches by a Messiah, and an uninformed electorate. The super rich vote for leftists at a higher percentage and the super poor vote for leftists in a higher percentage.
Folks between $30,000 per year and $300,000 per year vote overwhelmingly for conservatives and Republicans. You can dismiss us kamper and you can TRY HARD NOT to understand us but it might behoove you for future discussions to work to understand our point of view.
We do care.
We do love.
We do want this country to prosper.
We care about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Get educated on the issues and listen to our point of view. You might see if you put yourself in our shoes what we are saying. Sure there are fringe freaks who you cannot agree with. THERE ARE IN BOTH PARTIES. The personalities don’t matter.
What matters is the issues, philosophy and policy.
Leftist philosophy does not help a country prosper. Period.
Baklava,
You wrote:
“Get educated on the issues and listen to our point of view. You might see if you put yourself in our shoes what we are saying.”
You might be interested in a study by psychologist Jonathan Haidt (Univ of Va, I believe) that demonstrated that conservatives can think like liberals (in other words, know how liberals think), but liberals have demonstrated that they simply can NOT put themselves in the shoes of the conservatives. This may account for much of the vitriol which liberals direct towards anyone who doesn’t follow their agenda lock step.
T, When I was a liberal I had the same vitriol. I actually “hated”, wanted rich people to pay more in taxes and it made no difference if somebody said that it would hurt the country to do that.
Toes: Yet another guilty white Canadian.
Where’s John Sprague at? Those two can comfort each other.
Baklava:
I know. Why are you suggesting I’m trying to make you feel guilty?
So many angry replies to a post describing white supremacists. As for the “condescending Canadian” stuff, the phrase “ready for a black president” generates 166,000 Google hits. It’s a mainstream topic.
If you care to follow up, please do consider this short video and article.
Perhaps those of you who believe my comments attacked Republicans could let me know how you came to that conclusion.
You still avoid issues Toes.
Why?
You project.
It reflects more about you than us. There is a cottage industry of people like you. That’s what 166,000 people can do when they lack perspective…
It doesn’t make me want to vote for somebody in this 50/50 nation that does not understand economics.
Toes:
“Perhaps those of you who believe my comments attacked Republicans could let me know how you came to that conclusion.”
Actually “Toes”, you did not make a political distinction. You simply made a blanket statement about how it was hard to believe we “thoughtless Americans” could vote for a black guy.
Seeing that we are apparently further along than enlightened Canadians in that regard, I was wondering if you would like to revise your earlier words of condescension.
Toes?
I wonder when Sheehan is going to get the message. As she is long done bashing Bush, she is of absolutely no use to the left. They don’t want her running against Pelosi. Is she daft? She is supposed to have disappeared long ago.
Harry, that’s not what I wrote (and you know it).
Baklava, your projection theory is cool! But I voted for Olivia Chow in the Canadian federal election. Look her up.
And NeoNeocon …
Let’s sit down to a quiz one day, shall we, and see who knows more about the other’s country.
That said, wow, it’s a mistake to contextualize any critique of American culture as Canadian. I’ll never learn.
Yes, I appreciate the USA’s importance. If I didn’t care about the fate of the nation I wouldn’t invest the time to understand its politics and Republican culture. But all that time pays off. Every once in a while you can actually hit a nerve.
I wouldn’t invest the time to understand its politics and Republican culture.
That assumes you understand Lincoln. That may or may not be true actually.
Toes:
“Harry, that’s not what I wrote (and you know it).”
Toes, this was you yesterday at 7:57 am:
“People are stunned that Americans are actually about to elect a black President. And I think the reason it’s stunning is that everybody pretty much senses that your culture’s not ready.
…To many (tens of thousands? hundreds of thousands?) of thoughtless Americans, Obama’s genuinely anti American…:
Thoughtless you said. Not enlightened enough of a culture to vote for a black guy you implied.
I guess if I were to write an unfair generalization of Canadians, I would use the word “dishonest”. With you, it certainly fits.
BTW: We here in the US usually dont consider political leanings a separate “culture”. Just a heads up.
We are going to vote for a President to take care of the issues that matter to the people, not to make history as the “First” anything.
[b]1) care
2) want to teach a man to fish rather than give fish (which incidentally is born of love
3) want to lower costs of health care, college tuition, energy prices
4) want to benefit everyone by having good sound economic policy[/b]
Huh? What? Were it that simple. As far as I know you haven’t kicked the social conservatives out of your party. We might have a few differences on abortion, stem cells, global warming, and conservatives almost always deride environmental issues when it comes to the spending their dollars, until they can’t avoid it anymore. We can also argue over gun control and whether it’s a living constitution or not. I can probably come up with some more, if i think awhile.
Logern:
“conservatives almost always deride environmental issues when it comes to the spending their dollars, until they can’t avoid it anymore.”
OK. Lets discuss global warming. (Its being called “climate change” now).
What scientific evidence have you seen that convinces you the most that climate change is man made and a significant threat to the global environment?
Toes?
Logern?
Anybody else notice a pattern here?
Harry,
have you noticed liberals almost always have alarmist knee-jerk reactions to environmental issues and immediately insist we spend public dollars for the solution? Then, when it turns out not to be such a crisis after all, they abandon that cause and sound the alarm on the latest crisis du jour.
First off, is intergenerational equity a bad thing? Even if climate change is not anthropogenic based, as a simple matter of logic, how is (what I assuming is) your position of doing nothing superior to a pro-active position? If you reduce your source activity, balanced with economic considerations, even if you assume global warming isn’t by human intervention, moving towards green energies and reducing emissions is something we are in the process of doing anyway. At least in the U.S. –although right now China is going off the charts, and I forget, perhaps India?
At any rate what was the cogent argument for sitting back on our heels. I’ve never heard one.
When did we stop sounding the alarm?
Logern:
“At any rate what was the cogent argument for sitting back on our heels. I’ve never heard one.”
How ’bout an absence of a global environmental threat Logern? Why would we put out money and further ruin our economy for a phantom menace?
I had asked you what scientific evidence you had seen that convinced you that climate change was man made and a significant threat to the global environment. You admit to not really having any evidence that the earth is warming due to human activity. What evidence do you have that the earth is warming at all?
Secret hint: There is a reason to why the words “global warming” have been replaced by “climate change”.
Obama tonight, said, “In just five days– we will overturn the failed policies of DECADES.”
He said this at a rally in Columbia, Missouri, tonight. And went on to say that he was going to “take the United States in a whole new direction.”
Yup. Just your garden-variety Democrat, folks.
DECADES. This means he aims to overturn the usual DEMOCRAT policies, too. He’s crowing already, and he’s planning to govern from a hard-Left position.
I tried to find the clip on Youtube and the Greta Van Susteren website (they aired this bit of his speech as it was streaming live, then cut to a prepared Joe the Plumber segment, and I was in shock). But it’s too soon for either.
I also went on the Obama website and got seriously creeped out: “Join the Movement!” Cult of personality stuff writ large; Nothing about being “American,” nothing, even, about being a gung-ho Democrat.
Y’all, this guy has to be stopped. He’s going to do irreparable damage to our nation.
I posted this on another contrarian blog, and a smart aleck replied that Reagan had used the same phrase. I couldn’t find evidence of that on Google, though, so I don’t credit it. And to imply that the two men would mean anything remotely similar by it is insane.
I tried to find a clip of this on Youtube (no dice, too soon) and on BO’s website–boy, was that a creepy experience. Talk about Cultism! “Join the MOVEMENT,” everyone called by their first names, no sign of patriotism, not even a reference to the Democrat Party, for heaven’s sake. This is bad, folks.
At any rate, as I watched it (on Greta’s show on Fox), I was hit full-force with the conviction that this guy thinks he has it in the bag, and his colossal arrogance, always ill-concealed, has led him to crow in triumph before the fact.
And let the mask slip.
If evidence is so clear, Harry Mc Hitler, you’ll be getting the Nobel Prize, I expect.
Still you could weight the more dire predictions of climate change against econmic feasibility.
And you don’t win.
Well, in my humble opinion.
Logern:
“Still you could weight the more dire predictions of climate change against econmic feasibility.”
Meaning what? I could make dire predictions all day long. If I cant and/or wont provide you with proof that you should actually take action, do you take action just on my say so?
Toes says: Let’s sit down to a quiz one day, shall we, and see who knows more about the other’s country….
Yes, I appreciate the USA’s importance. If I didn’t care about the fate of the nation I wouldn’t invest the time to understand its politics and Republican culture.
You win–you know more about America than I will ever, ever know about Canada.
Yes, I appreciate Canada’s impotence. I don’t care about the fate of that nation and I won’t invest the time to understand its politics and Soviet Canuckistan culture.
(what the heck is “Republican Culture” anyhow? I’m not a Maoist! Culture doesn’t define politics nor vice versa. The personal is not political!)
Really, internet Canadians come in two flavors: America hating anti-Israel neo-nazis and America hating anti-Israel leftists.
What I do know about Canada is that there is a helluva lot of neo-nazis and white supremecists in the hinterlands. The sensitive metro-canadasexuals think America is like that;
‘cept worse…
Still you could weight the more dire predictions of climate change against econmic feasibility.
Notice how it’s not called ‘Global Warming’ anymore?
Because, the Earth, it’s not warming.
It’s cooling. And that cooling can only be stopped, like The Warming; with American Tax Dollars.
Logern wrote, “how is (what I assuming is) your position of doing nothing superior to a pro-active position?”
Did you see that Florida broke a 150 year old cold record?
Did you know that President Bush’s administration has spent more on climate change than any other world leader or US president?
What is the role of the federal government with respect to climate change supposed to be in your mind? Spend more than we are spending? Defy laws of physics? Make nuclear cars?
Logern the leftist mischaracterizer wrote, “At any rate what was the cogent argument for sitting back on our heels. ”
Leftists will always mischaracterize OUR position. 100% of people are interested in doing something. It’s just not what leftists want. We are saying that leftists ideas and solutions are not the answers. We say that when 95-0 senators voted against the Kyoto treaty that why is it that Bush gets bashed for not implementing. We are tired of the lack of perspective and total lack of listening that leftists DO on a daily basis.
Progress is being made. You recognized that. Unfortunately you go backwards into the blame others bash others mode that your leftist leaders feed to you.
Sit down and talk with us. You’ll find out that:
1) Data has been presented incorrectly
2) There has been cooling in the last few years that has negated the .6 degree rise in temperature over the last 100 years. Negation means what is the issue any more….
3) Look at the data about the sun intensity. Don’t ignore it.
4) Let’s find a GOOD solution for emitting less and being good stewards of the planet. Realize that progress is being made in a range of technologies.
There is a reason why Bjorn Lomborg has a following. Dismissing him or attacking the messenger does no good. The message is important. Understand the message and let’s all talk about what we do moving forward…
If you think you are ready, go for it… List 3 things that you’d do as president with our precious resources and dollars to combat “climate change”.
Harry, you fell and hurt your bottom. I’m sorry, but that’s hardly my fault.
Tens of thousands of racist rednecks amounts to anywhere from 0.03% to 0.27% of the USA, and hundreds of thousands amounts to 0.3% to 1% (at the low end).
.
Toes:
“Harry, you fell and hurt your bottom. I’m sorry, but that’s hardly my fault.”
That seemed somewhat below what I would have considered sophisticated repartee. Not what I had expected from a Canadian. After all, you guys are so far above us mere rubes, nobody could ever be “stunned” that you guys are getting ready to elect a black guy Prime Minister.
Im sorry. I guess that isnt you guys after all is it?
But still, there must be something about you that makes you guys so superior to us “thoughtless” “racist rednecks” that hasnt yet come through in what you’ve posted so far.
Maybe if you continue with your thoughtful and reasoned argument I’ll pick up on it.
Gray, that’s some garden-variety American exceptionalism you’re sporting there.
Jesus loves you!
Toes, whats the point of your being here?
Harry, you’ve latched onto the Canadian thing like a newborn on a nipple.
A video of a thoughtless, racist, American redneck describing the momentum in the white supremacist movement and the threat to Obama
The reason why I ask “Toes” is because I dont think that you add anything of value to this forum. If juvenile venting is all you really rather do, there’s plenty of other places you can be. You certainly arent here for anything more meaningful than that.
Here’s hoping the hostess will be showing you the door soon.
As if any American cares what a Canadian thinks.
I don’t believe the real Obama will stand up until he, himself, knows who the real Obama is. I am of the opinion he has been trying to be so many people for so many people, he has no idea himself.
I do agree with O’Reilly on one thing. No one really knows the guy, except perhaps his wife.
No real history. No real accomplishments. No trial by fire. His true character, an unknown entity. I do not like his politics. That is all I really know about him.
Obama is our own Hugo Chavez. Our own “One man, one vote, one time”.
Non-critical thinkers like Toes who read the garbage in the guardian.uk think that white supremacists are rednecks; they get this from movies (fiction!) and think actors are fonts of wisdom.
Perhaps I was wrong. If you’re not for him, you’re against him. He tossing reporters off the plane.
Time for a Cindy Lauper song about true colors shining?
I asked Toes some questions. He has answered none of them. Hollow people are good at shouting slogans but not at lgoical discourse. In fact all hollow people know is slogans.
So Mrs. Toes, what is racism? When my African frineds divided themselves into tribes, is that racism? When they hate and kill each other because of tribal affiliation, is that racism?
When Obama supported one tribe, his tribe, against the other tribes in Kenya, is that racism? When Obama’s tribe went on a rampage of killing and looting is that racism?
How can a man who has encouraged tribal confilict in Africa present himself as a uniter here?
The Menace
I might have answered your question if you’d bothered to address the topic of my post.
Unqualified: I’m here to become better informed about you folks. That occasionally requires posting. I try to keep civil (of late), but it’s challenging.
Ah, I see, there’s a movement to recast the term ‘redneck’. Apologies for using the term as its been commonly understood for generations.
“Redneck,” Oxford English Dictionary
U.S. A member of the white rural labouring class of the southern States; one whose attitudes are considered characteristic of this class; freq., a reactionary.
Etymology
1893 H. A. SHANDS Some Peculiarities of Speech in Mississippi Red-neck,..a name applied by the better class of people to the poorer inhabitants of the rural districts.
1904 Dialect Notes An uncouth countryman. ‘The hill-billies came from the hills, and the rednecks from the swamps.’
1913 J. DAVIS Life & Speeches iii If you red-necks or hill billies ever come to Little Rock be sure and come to see me — come to my house.
1936 W. FAULKNER Absalom, Absalom! Rich and poor, aristocrat and redneck.
1959 Times Lit. Suppl. The ugly faces and, under prompting or provocation, the uglier actions of a handful of red-necks, crackers, tar-heels and other poor white trash here and there in the South.
1960 SpectatorThe old patrician families who are opposed to the graft, blackmail and demagogy by which the Boss, the tribune of the rednecks, keeps himself in power.
1969 Observer They [sc. communes] all shared two experiences: the search for new values, and attention from local rednecks and the police.
1971 J. BISHOP Days of Martin Luther King, Jr. The fearful Southern red-neck, committed to the credo that the black man is a bridge between the animal kingdom and the human, derided the speech as typical ‘coon shouting’.
1973 Black World Carload of rednecks came with the darkness to Slim’s house. Blew the horn until Slim’s daddy opened the door.
1975 Daily Tel. Was it because they might think his [sc. Govenor George Wallace’s] reputation as a Right-wing ‘red neck’ a political embarrassment?
1976 Time That was the point Carter was attempting to make when he said in 1970 that Maddox ‘has compassion for the little man’, and when he said that a Humphrey-Wallace ticket in 1972 ‘would do well in the South’, and when he called himself ‘basically a redneck’.
1977 D. JAMES Spy at Evening Middle-class rednecks like you..get all worked up about it.
1978 J. UPDIKE Coup Her momma’s a washrag and her daddy’s a redneck.
Toes said:
“I might have answered your question if you’d bothered to address the topic of my post.”
Mr. Toes I see you are still throwing slogans around which you clearly don’t know how to define. You are the one who is trying to change the subject.
Here is your quote
“To many (tens of thousands? hundreds of thousands?) of thoughtless Americans, Obama’s genuinely anti American: he’s a muslim, a socialist, a terrorist, a smooth-talking, dangerous, lying nigger.”
I don’t see any mention of red necks here. Obviously you are now defining “red neck” because you know you have lost on the racism argument. Obviously Canadians speak differently than we do. That word “nigger” is not considered polite conversation here in America. In all probability you are simply projecting your own racism on other people.
br549 Says:
“I do agree with O’Reilly on one thing. No one really knows the guy, except perhaps his wife. ”
The fact she was a sociology major would be enough to send me off running… There is like ONE who is an academic who is not a socialist.. and he famous for it (I think his name is Hollander)… famous enough I can remember his name on the spot…
.
No, you wouldn’t because the argument spans paragraphs.
And that’s enough for me. Holding this mirror up to you guys is getting heavy.
Colin Powell, Meet the Press
I’m also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, “Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim.” Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America.
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp#s=TX
Observations:
First:
Ninety nine (in the American case 99.999) percent of the population will never know the “real” nature of any national leader. We will always see people such as Governor Palin, Senator McCain, Senator Obama, and Senator Biden through their public positions, and really nothing more. That makes talk of a public figure’s “moral centre” pretty much empty wind; it involves nothing but sheer speculation. Likewise, we can speculate about each other, or, in an extreme case of meaningless verbiage, assign psychological or even spiritual explanations to whole categories of political opinion.
For example, consider this: how many posts here contain the words “spiritually empty”? After years of close knowledge of an individual, you might reasonably come to the conclusion that a person suffered from a lack of direction, commitment, and belief that you could call “spiritual emptiness”. But to apply that label to any large group of people, most of whom you have never met and will never meet, goes beyond risible. And, yes, I despise the “leftists” who arrogate to themselves the right to describe people in these terms, every bit as much as I despise the “rightists” who do the same.
Second:
Plenty of Americans who love the United States more than I do doubted Senator Obama’s electability, on a variety of grounds. However, most if not all of all the grounds for considering Senator Obama unelectable had to do with the racial history of the United States. And yes, those of us outside the United States have to agree with what Senator Obama, among others, has said on this score: the successes of Senator Obama’s campaign have transcended the history of race in the United States, in a way that speaks very well for the future of your country, whichever candidate wins.
Third:
When assessing political viewpoints or political candidates, it makes sense to ask the simple, practical question: does this policy work? Has it worked? From 1948 to 1978, a national and international consensus known loosely as “Bretton Woods” dominated political and economic thinking. Then, in the 1970s, a new set of ideas, from deregulation to more open trade, gained ascendancy. This set of ideas, known as the “Washington consensus”, has dominated from about 1978 to the present. In the 30 years from 1948 to 1978, the United States enjoyed a healthy manufacturing base, a more or less healthy balance of trade, and an enviable financial position in relation to the rest of the world. Today, after 30 years of the Washington consensus, you owe (yes, here come the debt again) almost a year’s GDP to people outside the United States, a fair fraction of it to the successors of Mao Zedong. It does not seem unreasonable to suggest that the Washington Consensus has not worked out all that well for you, and that some adjustment might make sense.
Spargg said:
“For example, consider this: how many posts here contain the words “spiritually empty”? After years of close knowledge of an individual, you might reasonably come to the conclusion that a person suffered from a lack of direction, commitment, and belief that you could call “spiritual emptiness”. But to apply that label to any large group of people, most of whom you have never met and will never meet, goes beyond risible. And, yes, I despise the “leftists” who arrogate to themselves the right to describe people in these terms, every bit as much as I despise the “rightists” who do the same.”
I noticed you didn’t mention Mr. Toes use of the word “nigger.” Perhaps that is the way Canadians talk? Exactly what is Mr. Toes doing if not categorizing a large group of people? Also, in my opinion, Mr. Toes prejudice against “red necks” is dispicable. Working class people are the very ones Mr. Obama and the left is supposed to be representing.
Your argument that it is unfair to categorize the people who are deeply prejudiced in their liberal viewpoint as spiritually empty is a more reasoned point. To the extent that anyone is filled with hatred towards other people whose only crime it that they disagree with them, I’d say they are spiritually empty. You may offer any other explaination you wish, but hatred comes from somewhere. I’m no great fan of president Bush, and I believe he greatly underestimated the difficulty he would face in Iraq. That doesn’t excuse the hatred many people have expressed.
“In the 30 years from 1948 to 1978, the United States enjoyed a healthy manufacturing base, a more or less healthy balance of trade, and an enviable financial position in relation to the rest of the world. Today, after 30 years of the Washington consensus, you owe (yes, here come the debt again) almost a year’s GDP to people outside the United States, a fair fraction of it to the successors of Mao Zedong. It does not seem unreasonable to suggest that the Washington Consensus has not worked out all that well for you, and that some adjustment might make sense.”
Your point is well taken. The real issue here as I see it is whether free trade is a good thing or a bad thing. Losing our manufacturing base has hurt many working class people in our country, but it has helped lift millions of people out of extreme poverty in other countries. From the global perspective the last 30 years have been exceptional in the amount of wealth generated for humanity. Because the U.S. started so far above other countries, our relative wealth has declined, but our absolute wealth has not. 30 years ago, we couldn’t have had this converstion because there were no affordable computers or internet. Right now the U.S. is suffering a massive wealth drain because we won’t use our own plentiful energy resources. Countries like France are heavily reliant on nuclear power. With breeder reactors, nuclear power is clean, safe, and has very little residual waste. The money we are wasting on energy could do a great deal to help lift up the working class people who have to pay the same price for fuel that the rich people do.
Late to the dance, as usual. The price for living 11 time zones away from EST, I guess, but a couple of observations. First, social chameleons can be the most dangerous of politicians, because they can win support from people and organizations who would normally not provide it, by telling them what they want to hear they way they want to hear it. A certain failed Austrian artist was able to do this in post-WWI Germany, and obtain the backing, or at least the acquiescence, of industrialists, military officers, and many of his social betters, who were not initially inclined to support his movement. How did he do this? By taking off the uniform and boots, putting on a business suit, and speaking in muted tones instead ranting. Yes, there was more to it than that, and early 21st Century America is not the Weimar Republic. So the analogy isn’t 100% on the mark, but there are some similarities.
Second, I would argue that it IS possible to know the “real” nature of a political figure through his public positions on the issues. There is a voting record in the Congress, Parliament, Diet, Knesset, or whatever that reflects that politician’s priorities, transcripts of speeches and hearings that show his interests and how he treats others, and media interviews that show how he addresses specific issues. It does require that the voter pay some attention, but with a bit of effort, you can get a good idea of what’s near and dear to the heart of just about any candidate for high office. Does it mean you know his “soul”? No, of course not. But it does mean you’re likely to know how he’ll handle the public’s business when it comes before him. Obama has a hard-left voting record (when he managed to vote something other than “present”), hard-left friends, and a history of never bucking the political machine. He may not govern that way as president, but the smart money says he does.
Third, and this is addressed to Mr. Spragge, there’s something to remember about debts. The reason countries like China invest in US bonds and other debt instruments is that they have very good reason to believe that they’ll get repaid, with interest. So far, they have. What do we get? The cash. So we can buy things like cheap Chinese manufactured goods, wide-screen TVs, and MQ-9 Reapers. So the Chinese hold the paper. If push came to shove, what would that paper be worth? Who would be the international debt collector? The UN? WTO? Please. What would the Chinese repossess? The 82nd Airborne? I’d like to see them try. Would the US defaulting on its international debts screw up the global financing system? Absolutely. But in many bankruptcies, the creditor is often the one who gets screwed while the debtor rebuilds his credit history with relatively little pain and suffering. Look at Russia since the mid-1990s, then imagine the same thing on a much larger scale.
Menace: Two comments:
One: I decline to take responsibility for anything another person posted here.
Two: Linking “hate” and spiritual emptiness merely changes from one preconception to another. Most of the people you call “liberals” or “leftists” don’t hate conservatives. A lot of people believe the current “conservative” movement has run your country into the ground fiscally, and dragged your name through the mud morally. And that makes them angry. And they can point to a lot of evidence: abuses at abu Ghraib, the network of “black” prisons, the “extraordinary renditions”, eight years of significant budget deficits, 4000+ Americans and hundreds of thousands of others dead in Iraq and the “global struggle against violent extremism”. You may not view these facts the way I and others do, but you cannot possibly conclude that we hate, and more that I can conclude that those who see the abuses at abu Ghraib and the deaths of so many Iraqis as acceptable or necessary “hate” Iraqis, or Arabs, or Muslims. Simply replacing one categorical judgment for another has no real value. Words and expressions like “hating” or “spiritually empty” rest on assumptions about things you cannot possibly know, and therefore have no real value.
Waltj:
One: Godwin’s law.
Two: Yes, you can guess at what a public figure will do by looking at their record. By looking at his record, and his speeches, I can guess that Senator Obama will marginally increase tax rates on top earners, and reduce them on lower income families, propose a plan to cover Americans without insurance for health care, create or enlarge a civilian volunteer program linked to educational funding, and use the “bully pulpit” of the presidency to urge a change in the culture of acquisition, the winner take all society.
Three: The huge debts owed by American consumers and businesses to entities based outside the United States would complicate any attempt you made to ditch your debts. Aside from the US treasury, American families and businesses owe almost $10 trillion to foreign entities. Those entities have American subsidiaries with the ability to collect the money owing. The American government could only offer debt relief in these circumstances by selectively invalidating huge sums in personal and corporate debt. That would make the United States something very close to a socialist society: a government big enough to relieve Americans of the debts they owe internationally could also, to use President Ford’s memorable phrase, take from Americans anything (and everything) they have.
As Argentina discovered, a debt crisis in fiscal terms often produces a sharp left turn in social terms. If you want to see Wal-mart stores derelict and GM plants occupied and turned into workers’ cooperatives, you should push the idea of ditching your debts.
Mr. Spragge,
I suppose we would have to agree that there is a problem before we could discuss what is causing it. Probably the people on the left don’t even realize there is something wrong.
For anyone interested in what is going on in Canada, I invite you to view this website. This is a man who has been prosecuted by the Canadian kangaroo courts.
http://ezralevant.com/2008/10/alberta-hrc-christians-have-no.html
Pingback:An Exceedingly Interesting Round-up | The Anchoress
Pingback:Washington Rebel
Did Toes end up dying from a drone strike… because Hussein lasted a lot longer than 4 months.