Now that I have had a chance to catch my breath after the 2008 election cycle, work my way through a sibling’s debilitating illness and just generally get my head back on straight (or as straight as it ever can be), I hope to get back to posting here on a more regular basis. Everytime I think I can walk away, something comes back into the news and I feel the need to comment.
Thank you all for continuing to read the old posts and I do hope to have new material for you soon.
Stopped by Andrew Sullivan’s Daily Dish today. I just can’t help myself. I counted myself among his biggest fans and have been thoroughly disillusioned by his slide from logic and sound reason.
The Obama camp has been as guilty or more of negative campaigning and taking a liberal approach to the truth as the McCain camp. Even Sullivan can see it:
“Playing racial politics this way is not what Obama promised to do. Cut it out.”
In another post he writes:
“It’s a little complicated and Obama slips in that “potentially” to avoid a Palin-style lie, but it’s still clearly fear-mongering and unfair.”
When someone as solidly Obama-ized as Sullivan can see the blatant misrepresentation, there definitely is something there. If only he would realize that Obama is not the second coming nor someone who is going to miraculously heal the world. He is just a politician trying to get elected and saying whatever he can to achieve that goal. No different than any other. He is not transformative in any way other than, as Obama himself puts it, he looks different or as Sullivan himself has written:
“What does he offer? First and foremost: his face.”
Sullivan, the press… EVERYONE should look beyond the hype and the carefully crafted facade and dig into his policies, his ideals and what little record he has. He should get the same scrutiny as any other politician because that is what he is. Nothing more and nothing less.
Once the stars leave Sullivan’s eyes, maybe can get back to being a grounded voice for small government. I hope so. I miss that.
I have come to expect the lowest common denominator from both sides when it comes to campaign advertisements this election season. Just when I think it can’t get any worse, along comes a new low.
“Obama’s ad features a narrator saying: “They want us to forget the insults we’ve put up with…the intolerance…they made us feel marginalized in this country we love so much.”
The screen then shows these two quotes from Limbaugh:
“…stupid and unskilled Mexicans”
—Rush Limbaugh“You shut your mouth or you get out!”
—Rush LimbaughThe narrator then says, “John McCain and his Republican friends have two faces. One that says lies just to get our vote…”
Obama is basically calling McCain a racist in his new ad “Dos Caras.” When questioned about the veracity of this advertisement the Obama campaign offers proof that is so thin even ABC, not a huge fan of the McCain camp, calls them out.
“The greater implication the ad makes, however, is that McCain is no friend to Latinos at all, beyond issues of funding the DREAM act or how NCLB money is distributed. By linking McCain to Limbaugh’s quotes, twisting Limbaugh’s quotes, and tying McCain to more extremist anti-immigration voices, the Obama campaign has crossed a line into misleading the viewers of its new TV ad. In Spanish, the word is erróneo.”
I guess this is what Obama means by practicing a new kind of politics. All is fair in the name of winning. Didn’t the Democrats used to rightfully criticise the Republicans for this kind of tactic? Simply depressing.
The Elite in this country, particularly in the media, just don’t get it. This from CNN’s Political Ticker:
“The differences between Barack Obama and John McCain couldn’t be more well-defined. Obama wants to change Washington. McCain is a part of Washington and a part of the Bush legacy. Yet the polls remain close. Doesn’t make sense…unless it’s race.”
It couldn’t be that approximately half of this country doesn’t want an ultra-liberal President with a serious Socialist streak. Nah. Racism. That is the only thing that could explain it.
What does it say about a Presidential candidate that needs a Vice-President to be a “governing pick.” Maybe that he is not ready for the job alone? Interesting that those who are apoplectic over McCain daring to pick someone they see as not ready for the job to be “one 72 year old heartbeat away from the Presidency” seem to have no problem with Obama himself needing to be propped up.
How can it be argued from those on the left that Obama’s campaign is not about race and then simultaneously argued that if he loses it will be because of racism? That somehow the only reason not to vote for Obama is because of:
“a vague, sophisticated, low-key prejudice that is chameleonlike in its ability to adapt to new surroundings and to hide even from those firmly in its grip.”
This article written by a Princeton educated, Harvard professor of Law, sums up what many feel about the Obama campaign — that someone who has obviously benefited from the opportunities of America can still find this country to be a dark and hateful place. Michelle Obama seems to embody this philosophy.
I am from the deep South and yes, racial prejudice still remains in this country. I see it everyday. I also see rampant sexism, homophobia and racial tension regarding immigrants. America has that side to it as do other cultures and societies. The difference is though, that I don’t think the vast majority of Americans feel this way. I believe this country is filled with people who don’t see color, gender, religion or orientation. I feel that as one generation passes, each new one takes us another step away from the darker side of our past.
Yes, there will be people who vote against Obama because he is black and there will also be people who only vote for him because he is black. Many people on both sides of that coin will be white. But, I do believe that there is a case to be made against Obama based solely upon his leftist, semi-Marxist ideals and that this is what is keeping him from the Whitehouse, not simply the color of his skin.
Obama is an elite intellectual and it is snobbery that is keeping him from connecting to people like the ones I know. It is this leftist idea of “we know what’s best and if you weren’t so unsophisticated you would get that” which is preventing his breaking through the cotton belt barrier.
I have said it before, to not vote for Obama simply because of race is shameful. However, people need to acknowledge that there are plenty of reasons based solely upon philosophy, ideals and party platform to oppose an Obama Presidency and such opposition does not immediately tar someone as racist.
Kennedy implies that if Obama were white he would not be meeting such resistance. To counter this point I offer up Al Gore and John Kerry. A repackaging of leftist ideology that has been rejected in past elections would have a hard time carrying an electorate that is largely divided along these lines regardless of who happened to be the standard-bearer. To quote Senator Obama, “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig.”
Perhaps McCain wasn’t so far off in his remarks about Obama, the election and Iraq. Though Obama might not want to lose a war to win an election, he seems to certainly be willing to drag one out to facilitate his campaign.
Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari stated on the record that during Obama’s recent tour of Iraq:
“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington.”
Obama has clearly placed his own political aspirations ahead of not only what is good for the US and Iraq, but also the safety of American troops on the ground. America derserves a Commander in Chief who places “Country First.”
Has Andrew Sullivan completely lost all sense of decency? For someone who routinely rails against stereotyping and various “isms” (racism, sexism, etc. etc.), to come out with such a patently dense comment:
“She is a long-time member of the Assemblies Of God. That’s all you need to know.”
is simply mind blowing. Sullivan is someone who has publicly wrestled with his own faith, so for him to dismiss an entire congregation of people in such an off handed way is quite frankly beneath his intellect.
I know he is fully invested emotionally in The One’s ascension but how can someone whose voice was once one of sound reason have descended into vile invective. His arguments are no longer rooted in reason. He has finally eradicated what was left of his tarnished reputation. Sad, truly sad.
Sarah Palin really gets under the skin of the liberal left. I get that. But statements such as this:
“She’s got a Taliban-like tolerance for beliefs unlike her own.”
are beyond the pale. There is no evidence whatsoever that Sarah Palin believes or advocates the execution of those whom she feels are apostate to certain religious beliefs. This statement either attempts to smear Palin with unsubstatiated invective or to completely ignore and sweep under the rug the Taliban’s human rights atrocities. Either way, it shows how far the left is willing to go to demonize those with whom they disagree.
Now here is a reason to vote against Obama if there ever was one:
“If Americans reject Obama, they will be sending the clearest possible message to the rest of us – and, make no mistake, we shall hear it.”
Note to the rest of the world. American’s do not take well to being threatened. Since it is the USA that routinely pulls Europe’s collective butt out of the fire, I wouldn’t bite the hand that protects you.
Nope. No elitism here:
“There was no way I was going to wait in line with a bunch of kids to get into Invesco Field,” said one relieved donor.”
OK Andrew. It is dirty pool for the the Republicans to mention Obama’s half brother but not for Democrats to talk about Cindy McCain’s half sister? I know you desperately want The One to ascend but have you lost all prior sense of fairness?
You didn’t raise an eyebrow when they tried to paint Cindy McCain as somehow unfeeling toward the plight of her half sister because their father had written her out of his will. The McCain’s have adopted an underprivileged child and are raising it. Cindy McCain founded a charity that helps provide “MASH like emergency medical care to disaster-struck or war-torn third world areas.”
Remember, it was Obama who stated at Saddleback Church:
“We still don’t abide by that basic precept of Matthew that whatever you do for the least of my brothers, you do for me.”
I guess he just wasn’t talking about his own brother.
Andrew Sullivan asks the following question:
“What does it say that a leading Presidential candidate can boast of support from an institution that has a deep history of racism and religious bigotry? And what does it say of a candidate to cater to a man who once denigrated his fellow Americans?”
And he answers:
“The answer is that the candidate is putting power before decency…”
OK. He didn’t exactly write those words. I’ll admit I changed a few. But even in reading the original text where he rips Romney for supporting Bob Jones University and even mentions his detest of Bush for catering to them in 2000, the point gets made. To support a racist institution is, by inferrence, to support racism.
But neither Bush nor Romney as far as I can find, attended Bob Jones University, sent any of their children to Bob Jones University, ever gave one penny of financial support to Bob Jones University, etc. etc. Simply for speaking words of admiration Sullivan tarred these candidates through rather limited association with the racist past of BJU.
Contrast this with his support of Barack Obama who has a 20 year history of admiration, association and financial support for a church whose pastoral guide is a man who blasted racial, bigoted and unpatriotic speach from the pulpit. Sullivan excuses Obama by writing:
“I think that the kind of politics that ensures that someone’s pastor’s rhetoric trumps every other issue in a campaign is waning. Because many Americans understand that the country’s problems are really too deep for this kind of thing to be dispositive. Because Obama’s long record is transparently not in any way equatable with Jeremiah Wright’s worst moments on YouTube.”
Sullivan is fully in the grips of Obamamania. He is firmly an “Obamaist” if you will. His arguments are intellectually convenient. For a man who wrote:
“I had a conniption about Bush’s catering to BJU bigotry in 2000 and then swiftly forgot about it. I didn’t see it as the harbinger that it was: of a GOP rooted in religious prejudice, racial fears, and sexual panic. I’ve learned my lesson.”
the lesson obviously didn’t stick. Or it got in the way of his rush to elect a candidate who has described himself as a blank slate upon which others project their political hopes. Well, Sullivan’s hopes are in the Barack basket and now he must rescue the politics of the future by practicing the politics of the past. The story of Obama’s support of Reverand Wright is not going away. I fear Obama may be, as Sullivan titled his post, toast.
E.J Dionne writes:
“She [Clinton] promises toughness, competence, clarity and experience in a year when Democrats are seeking something closer to salvation.”
Maybe after years of wandering in the liberal desert, Democrats aren’t seeking a competent leader as much as the “chosen one.” Someone who reinforces their instilled ideas and makes them feel good about their core beliefs. Obama’s campaign isn’t as much about how he will govern as how he makes people feel about government and themselves. It is the liberal’s unending search for acceptance played out on the national stage.
Obama’s campaign has tapped into the collective cult of victimization. He has spoken to those who feel put upon, unfairly disadvantaged and outcast with the same message delivered from countless Sunday pulpits — if you simply believe it will be manifest.
Left out is the message of self reliance and hard work. Brushed aside is the concept that success is built upon effort. Obama gives hope that things can be better not based on concrete policies requiring the drudgery that is governing but magically by his occupation of the Whitehouse.
As James Kirchick writes:
“What is most obnoxious about the Obama candidacy is the belief that his mere presence in the White House will end the world’s problems…”
He points out that Andrew Sullivan, a self-described conservative and all out Obama supporter, asserts that a “first and foremost” reason to vote for Obama is “his face.” As if the presence of a young, bi-racial man in the Oval Office will somehow show the world that America has now redeemed itself. By being who he is, Obama offers an opportunity to transcend racial tensions and repay years of oppression. His candidacy is a chance to assuage liberal guilt.
And this makes people feel good.
This hyperventilation is the actualization of a society that has told their children they were special regardless of performance. This has bread an expectation of success. Obama is the personification of the core liberal belief that society (and therefore government) can and should do better at taking care of it’s citizens. The idea that everyone is entitled is his message of hope.
As Kirchick points out, one day America may well look back on this time and ask, “What the hell was this all about.” Hopefully, for Obama’s sake, he won’t be expected to deliver the hype.
