RT @TWERadio: Vanderbilt University stands firm against campus-ministry groups 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Obama bringing “light unto all the world”
We Americans may think we know a thing or two about political satire, but we don’t have anything on the Brits. Gerard Baker, the United States editor and an assistant editor of The Times of London, is, as they say, “spot on” in his column today, which chronicles Barack Obama’s world tour:
“And so it was, in the fullness of time, before the harvest month of the appointed year, the Child ventured forth—for the first time—to bring the light unto all the world.
“He travelled fleet of foot and light of camel, with a small retinue that consisted only of his loyal disciples from the tribe of the Media.”
I can’t do it justice in this short post, so read the whole thing here.
Topic: Campaign 2008, News Desk
Keywords: barack-obama, satire
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
back to top242 Comments to “Obama bringing “light unto all the world””
And such was his attraction, that over 200,000 people trekked in to see him.
Meanwhile, his opponent, long in tooth, and short in memory (whatever did happen to good old Czechoslovakia by the way?) labored to draw of 100 in his own country.
Report comment to moderator
Scathingly brilliant satire.
Report comment to moderator
By post 1, I see that the liberals don’t see that they are being mocked, nor will they examine why.
That was great! Hope it gets distributed widely over here.
Report comment to moderator
Shhh, don’t let Arcadia know about the mocking part, NJL.
Report comment to moderator
We mustn’t deprive the atheists of someone to believe in! (Not for awhile, anyway.)
Report comment to moderator
Ya gotta admit, Outkast, they just go where the media takes them. They just want to be “popular.”
These people have no sense of humor. You see how they haven’t posted……
Report comment to moderator
Why is Obama so popular?
Blacks vote for him because he is half-black.
Whites vote for him because it is an easy way to feel noble.
Report comment to moderator
That was a good read! I also read this today, and got a kick out of it. It’s from Russ Vaughn, and it’s posted at American Thinker.
(With apologies to Julia Ward Howe and her revered Battle Hymn of the Republic)
Mine eyes have seen the stories from Obama’s media horde;
They are trampling out what sanity their liberal brains once stored.
How he’s using them is frightening, he’s become their liberal lord,
But the dupes keep marching on.
You’ll be sorry how he’s used ya; you’ll be sorry how he’s used ya,
You’ll be so sorry when he —— ya, but you dupes keep marching on.
You can read the rest here;
http://tinyurl.com/6db2cu
Report comment to moderator
But in the darkest hour,” said Sen. Obama, “the people of Berlin kept the flame of hope burning. The people of Berlin refused to give up. And on one fall day, hundreds of thousands of Berliners came here, to the Tiergarten, and heard the city’s mayor implore the world not to give up on freedom. ‘There is only one possibility,’ he said. ‘For us to stand together united until this battle is won…. The people of Berlin have spoken. We have done our duty, and we will keep on doing our duty’.
As the WSJ remarked today: This, from a U.S. Senator whose consistent message to the people of Baghdad, a similarly besieged city, also dependent on America’s protection, has been, in effect, to give up.
People are beginning to wake up to the fact, that Obama, as the Texans say is all hat and no cattle. Can anyone cite a significant Obama achievement in his political career.?
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia in #1,
“And such was his attraction, that over 200,000 people trekked in to see him”
Yeah, too bad none of them can vote. And when he had the chance to visit American troops at Rammstein and Landstahl, he canceled. Why would he do that? Well maybe this is why.
http://tinyurl.com/6d5cas
From the link;
“The message here is that thousands of screaming German fans at the Tiergarten take precedence over visiting Americans serving their country at Rammstein and Landstuhl. Maybe one of the networks following Obama could interview a few of the soldiers about how they perceive that set of priorities from Obama.
And in an update, we discover it wasn’t “scheduling problems” that made Obama miss his date with the troops
Obama canceled a previously-planned stop to visit thousands of American service personnel, including troops wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan being treated at Landstuhl, so he could hold a political rally for Germans and go shopping in Berlin. Now that’s a nice set of priorities for a man who wants to become Commander in Chief.
I guess unless he can use troops as props in his little propaganda shows, they mean nothing to him.”
He’s a joke, and a bad one at that. Maybe this explains why the Dems don’t want to help overseas soldiers vote. They won’t forget this slight by BO.
Report comment to moderator
If Obama is elected President black people will realize that white people are not holding them back and they alone are responsible for their actions.
Just kidding.
Report comment to moderator
Of course, one should understand that The Times of London is a pro-conservative newspaper owned by Rupert Murdoch.
Satire itself is great. But one should understand the point behind this particular piece is to denigrate Obama and to hopefully defeat his election. In short, it was written for political purposes.
Report comment to moderator
Oh please Anlir. Like Obamas whole reason for going wasn’t for political purposes? Yeah, how dare some in the media not get in line for the BO koolaid. They got some nerve!
Report comment to moderator
“But one should understand the point behind this particular piece is to denigrate Obama and to hopefully defeat his election. In short, it was written for political purposes.”
Duh. And John Stewart, just loves us all and is a dedicated journalist who has devoted his life to the pursuit of truth and justice. If he helps to defeat John McCain in the meantime, well that’s just a side effect.
Report comment to moderator
I always laugh when people say there is no liberal bias in the media.
Has the MSM ever fawned over a conservative the way they have over Obama?
Report comment to moderator
“The message here is that thousands of screaming German fans at the Tiergarten take precedence over visiting Americans serving their country at Rammstein and Landstuhl.”
So… If Clinton was our first black president, will Obama be our first European president?
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, we may grant that the Times of London is politically opposed to Obama, though there is a large element of truth in Baker’s claim of Obama’s arrogance.
Joan Venocchi, a liberal writer for the liberal Boston Globe wrote:
Barack Obama always was a larger-than-life candidate with a healthy ego. Now he’s turning into the A-Rod of politics. It’s all about him.
He’s giving his opponent something other than issues to attack him on: narcissism.
A convention hall isn’t good enough for the presumptive Democratic nominee. He plans to deliver his acceptance speech in the 75,000 seat stadium where the Denver Broncos play. Before a vote is cast, he’s embarking on a foreign policy tour that will use cheering Europeans – and America’s top news anchors – as extras in his campaign. What do you expect from a candidate who already auditioned a quasi-presidential seal with the Latin inscription, “Vero possumus” – “Yes, we can”?
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, have you had your coffee this morning?
“But one should understand the point behind this particular piece is to denigrate Obama and to hopefully defeat his election. In short, it was written for political purposes.”
Someone pass the Captain Obvious costume to Anlir!
Report comment to moderator
I mean why do our “representatives” care what the Germans or Mexicans (or illegal aliens) think? Do they not represent citizens of the United States? I’m beginning to think not. Perhaps if Obama wins we should rename the country to First Republic of American Europe?
Report comment to moderator
NICK H. PETERS: Blacks vote for him because he is half-black.
We can excuse the ignorance, but not the racism. The persistence of evangelical Republicans in writing a fraction upon Obama’s forehead is sick. Very few African-Americans in our land have a purely African genetic heritage. The median mix may be 60 -40 either way of half-and-half. But it doesn’t matter. Obama would be a naturalized African-American even if he were 100% white. Nobody instructs me about my genetic inheritance, and unless Nick Peters is plagued by people defining his numerators and divisor, he’s got no excuse for this fillthy obsession with Obama’s .
Report comment to moderator
So you now think Nick is an evangelical Republican, Scroop?
Report comment to moderator
For those of you who don’t know Obama is giving his acceptance speech at the Convention on the 45th anniversary of King’s “I have a dream” speech.
The media will be in a state of ecstasy. Their smarmy indulgence of black people will reach new, unimaginable heights.
Report comment to moderator
To Scroop and Outkast
Obama got 92% of the black votes during the primaries. He was running against Ms. Clinton, the wife of our “first black President”.
So why did all those black people vote for Obama? Was it his position on farm subsidies and the environment?
Report comment to moderator
Scroop says;
“We can excuse the ignorance, but not the racism.”
Do you have another reason that 90% of black voters support BO, other than him being black? If Nicks comment is racist, what of the people who vote for BO simply because of his coloring? Nick’s comment seems accurate.
And I’m sure you’ve read Nick’s Bush rants. He doesn’t sound like a Republican to me. And he is hardly a good example of, as you call us, “evangelical republicans”. I’m pretty sure he’s Catholic, not Evangelical.
Report comment to moderator
A quick scan of this brilliant “satire” convinced me we have to teach the King James Bible in our schools, just so readers don’t have to die laughing in a saturated slough before reaching the sparkling springs of the real thing.
Goethe, for example: Beneath the Siegessäule, a mystical choir. Obama embraces millions. The unattainable, the indescribable become an event. The eternal-feminine draws us ever onward in perpetual progress.
My biggest problem with Gerald Baker’s literary effort is his omission of necessary parts of the story, such as the Jews yelling “Crucify Him!”
Report comment to moderator
Nick H. Peters talks like the naked white racists of my neck of the woods.
Report comment to moderator
Perhaps, Scroop, the Baker article could be alluding to Obama as (dare I say it?) the anti-Christ?
Report comment to moderator
Obama bringing “light unto all the world”
I have a friend from New York who likes to say that they see the light at the end of the tunnel . . . unfortunately it’s New Jersey.
Report comment to moderator
LOL, Metanoia!
Report comment to moderator
PETER L — You’re probably right, unfortunately. Israelis could laugh at Obama as the Messiah, but evangelical Republicans would have to laugh at him as the anti-Christ. Of course.
Tell me, is this finer satire than a Hitler analogy?
Report comment to moderator
Obama doesn’t have a religion. He IS religion.
Or that’s how the media is portraying him right now. Our savior.
This posted article is almost equal parts satire and reality.
Report comment to moderator
Obama promises to ‘remake the world’
By MIKE ALLEN | 7/24/08
With an eye towards the future, with resolve in our heart, let us remember this history, and answer our destiny, and remake the world once again.”
Obama believes he can “REMAKE the WORLD” – did he learn this at Wright’s church? — where does Rick Warren fit into this picturee
Report comment to moderator
Bottom line is that no matter what Obama does or doesn’t do, says or doesn’t say, or where he goes or doesn’t go, he’s gonna get criticized for it on here (and elsewhere). It’s pretty clear that the vast majority of the bloggers on here detest him, if not hate him. But then, this is a hyper-partisan Republican site, so it’s to be expected.
The thing is, most Americans aren’t hyper-partisan. And clearly a lot of them are favorably inclined toward Obama.
By any objective measurement, clearly this was a great week for Obama and a lousy one for McCain. But it was just one week out of many, with many more to come. That said, one does understand that these little “drips” do add up eventually.
Report comment to moderator
“Meanwhile, his opponent, long in tooth, and short in memory (whatever did happen to good old Czechoslovakia by the way?) labored to draw of 100 in his own country.”
Um – not so. McCain was just in my small town a couple weeks ago, and over 800 women turned out for his townhall meeting. I, for one, wasn’t able to get in, but would have liked to see him. I’m sure there were more that wanted to get in, but couldn’t.
I also see in the latest Mpls/St. Paul poll, McCain and Obama are tied. Obama had a 17 point lead there a couple weeks ago. Interesting.
Report comment to moderator
Not overly impressed by the conservative attempts at satire. Although it reveals something of the irrationality of some of his supporters its not nearly as amusing as it could be. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert have spent the entire week ridiculing the media fascination with Obama and Obama’s messiah like persona created by said media. That they have also used the same time to ridicule McCain demonstrates the equal opportunity nature of their satire. Besides McCain having lunch at a German sausage house the day Obama speaks in Berlin just begs for ridicule.
#10 AJ — At times, Obama has addressed troops and sometimes he doesn’t. scheduling and timing are considerations. The bitter Afghan soldier should remember that his stops at Afghanistan and Baghdad were “fact finding trips” with two other Senators and as such were paid for by the US tax payer. If he did stop to glad hand the crowd or address them, he would be accused of using taxpayer money to campaign. After he left the Middle East he was on his own dime (or more) and could plan campaign stops.
Report comment to moderator
Do you have another reason that 90% of black voters support BO, other than him being black? If Nicks comment is racist, what of the people who vote for BO simply because of his coloring? Nick’s comment seems accurate.
Originally, many blacks did not consider Obama’s candidacy serious however after the white voters of Iowa voted for him, he was given more consideration. And after Bill’s missteps in South Carolina they began to lose the female black vote. The nomination was Clinton’s for the taking but she messed it up by not delivering the knock out blow early and then alienating the black vote with her appeal to the white working class. Strategist who didn’t realize that the primary was based on proportional representation and not winner take all didn’t help her either.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir: By any objective measurement, clearly this was a great week for Obama and a lousy one for McCain.
Actually, McCain’s poll numbers declined slightly this past week and Obama’s majorly. See Here.
Report comment to moderator
TL
The overblown media pre-occupation with Obama has obscured the fact that McCain despite numerous missteps (which weren’t well reported b/c the media doesn’t follow him closely) is still doing quite well. McCain may still be able to build a quiet but large support of Americans outside the bright lights of the city and its media to either win or give the rest of the world a heart attack.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir: By any objective measurement, clearly this was a great week for Obama and a lousy one for McCain.
Actually McCain’s poll numbers declined slightly this past week and Obama’s majorly. See Here
Report comment to moderator
Peter
Looking at the state by state data, Obama is leading in the “swing states” of Ohio, Penn, and Indiana. The Upper MidWest seems to returning to the Democratic fold and the “New” southwest seems to be turning democratic. Dean’s 50 state strategy has McCain campaigning in 50 states.
Report comment to moderator
Bottom line is that no matter what Obama does or doesn’t do, says or doesn’t say, or where he goes or doesn’t go, he’s gonna get criticized for it on here (and elsewhere). It’s pretty clear that the vast majority of the bloggers on here detest him, if not hate him.
Anlir: The exact same can be true of McCain!
Bottom line is that no matter what John McCain does or doesn’t do, says or doesn’t say, or where he goes or doesn’t go, he’s gonna get criticized for it by the loons on the left. It’s pretty clear that the vast majority of the MSM and Democrat Party detest him, if not hate him.
Report comment to moderator
One does have to sit back with a slight smile and a look of amusement at the frustration and anger of the Republicans over Obama. So far they haven’t been able to draw a “bead” on him, though they have tried mightily. And they may yet succeed on that regard.
But, I think he has proven far more competent and politically smart than anyone (Democrat or Republican) anticipated.
Look, this is a guy who came out of the back of the pack, took on 8 other Democrats and won the nomination. More importantly, he knocked off the person who expected the Democratic primary to be her “coronation”. Did y’all really expect him to fold after winning the Democratic primaries?
I said on here over a year ago that I thought Obama had “it”, though I can’t describe what “it” is. Then this spring when he won Super Tuesday I said that I thought he would end up being the nominee.
He was not my first choice (Kucinich was). He wasn’t my second choice (Clinton) or even my third (Richardson). So I’m not head over heels in love with him. But I do think he’s a smart politician.
Report comment to moderator
Obama is a smart politician. But, so far, that’s all we know about him! He has little political history, and what he does have, isn’t flattering. He seems to say what his voters want to hear. These are not qualities I would want in a president – from either side of the aisle. He is a gifted speaker, but does he have any substance?
Report comment to moderator
Obama is a lightweight on substance, a heavyweight on image.
As an Illinoisan (until a year ago) I’m on record since last October that sooner or later his lack of record will catch up to him. I believe there has been a subtle shift in the MSM’s attitude toward BHO.
All of the network talking heads are vieing for one on one interviews. Obama sucks at one on ones. Each of these egotistical talking heads would love to be the one who scoops the others on revealing his ineptitude at formulating a coherent sentence off the cuff and without a teleprompter. They will turn on you in a nanosecond if it meant a “story.”
Look for the Republicans, conservatives and egotistical MSM talking heads to turn up the heat over BHO’s empty suit in the next 60 days. He can only make so many mistakes without eventually someone catching on and recognizing that he is not the best candidate for POTUS.
BTW. McCain isn’t the best candidate either, but we basically only have one of two choices and for conservatives McCain is still better than BHO.
Report comment to moderator
PETER LEAVITT: Actually, McCain’s poll numbers declined slightly this past week and Obama’s . . .
“. . . throughout the Cold War, the leaders of the Transatlantic Alliance resisted the siren song of popular pragmatism . . .” Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, slamming Obama yesterday in Die Welt (in German)
So, are Republicans poll whores or statesmen?
Report comment to moderator
He seems to say what his voters want to hear. These are not qualities I would want in a president . . .
Gimme a break, TL
Report comment to moderator
I, for one, found the biblical references in the piece amusing, especially the holding up his arms one. Coming back to this thread and reading the comments has been great fun, except for the Real AJ’s post regarding Obama’s canceling on the troops to go shopping. That’s more than a slight and even deeper than an insult. McCain would never have done that.
I heard one German on the German station last night say Obama was his new messiah. Enuf said. I also saw the new polls as referenced by TL that McCain is closing in. Add that to the polling that more than half of the people think the media is giving Obama a pass shows me that some of those drunk on the messiah thing are beginning to sober up. Even ABC admitted that anchors followed Obama on this trip, but none went with McCain on any of his. I guess South America meant nothing to them, but Europe does.
I give Nick a point or two for his posts. Nothing scares Nick, and that’s what I like about him. He calls ‘em as he sees ‘em and lets the chips fall where they may.
And Anlir, there’s no frustration or anger in this thread from the Republicans. The nastiness is coming from the leftists here. Like I said — no sense of humor at all!
Report comment to moderator
The “disciple media.” Perfect!
Report comment to moderator
Oh, I have no illusions that Obama’s run for office will result in a victory. There is still a lot of time and a lot can happen between now and then. And there is no doubt that the “swift boaters” are just around the corner waiting to ambush him. I think it will make John Kerry’s “swift boating” look like an American Girl tea party. I could be wrong, but I don’t think “swift boating” is going to work this time. For one thing, people are tired of it. For another, Obama is a bit more deft.
Report comment to moderator
ScroopMoth, I was responding to Anlir’s obiter dicta on Obama having such a swimming week compared to McCain. Polls for me are merely one piece of a large puzzle.
Personally, following Tocqueville, I find popular opinion on matters of national security to be usually naive and toxically dangerous.
I do agree with TL that Obama overplays to what the voters want to hear. Shelby Steele, the black writer, claims that Obama is basically a bargaining black who lacks a solid core of conviction from which to base his political views.
Steele in a 22 July piece wrote as follows:
But here lies his essential contradiction: His campaign is more cultural than political. He sells himself more as a cultural breakthrough than as a candidate for office. To be a projection screen for the cultural aspirations of both blacks and whites one must be an invisible man politically. Real world politics, in their mundanity, interrupt cultural projections. And so Mr. Obama’s political invisibility — a charm that can only derive from a lack of deep political convictions — may well serve his cultural appeal, but it also makes him something of a political mess.
Already he has flip-flopped on campaign financing, wire-tapping, gun control, faith-based initiatives, and the terms of withdrawal from Iraq. Those enamored of his cultural potential may say these reversals are an indication of thoughtfulness, or even open-mindedness. But could it be that this is a man who trusted so much in his cultural appeal that the struggles of principle and conscience never seemed quite real to him? His flip-flops belie an almost existential callowness toward principle, as if the very idea of permanent truth is passé, a form of bad taste.
Report comment to moderator
#9, Excellent post Peter Leavitt.
Report comment to moderator
HRW at #35,
Not buyin’ you’re excuses for Obama. The only time he seems to care about the troops is when the press cameras are rolling, and he’s reading a prepared script. He would have had to give that up to make his planned visit. He would have had only a few of his staff, and military photogs. He also would have been asked questions by people he hasn’t been real supportive of. Why settle for that when he can go talk to 200,00 who can’t vote, and can’t ask questions. He’s all about the photo op. He still could have went and visited, just without the dog and pony show. He chose not to.
And anyone who has been in the military knows a dog and pony show when they see one. And when the press isn’t around, they still stop and shake hands, unless you’re Obama. If there’s no one to see it, he despenses with such niceties.
As the soldier from link says, ” It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country.”
Exactly right son. Although he’s more afraid of your comments and questions. He’ll avoid them like the plague. It’s also why he won’t do a town hall meeting at Ft. Hood. He doesn’t want to answer questions from servicemen and women, or their wives and husbands. Who knows what kind of questions they might ask. No, Obama prefers the scripted, no surprise type of events, unless he’s talking with the base. He can tell them anything, and they’d buy it. But the military isn’t part of his base, unfortunately liberal socialists are. The fact that he chose non-voting socialists from another country, over injured American military speaks volumnes to his character and priorities. Canadians like yourself may like it, but he’ll pay a price with American voters.
And just as a little side thing here, who will Obama pick for VP? I thought Edwards had a good shot, but uh, not so much with recent developments about the mistress and love child thing. Imagine the outrage if a Republican left his wife, who is battling cancer, to run off and meet his mistress. I tend to think that Obama might take a back seat to that story, were Edwards a Republican VP candidate.
Yeah, yeah, I know, no media bias….
Report comment to moderator
Interesting quote about BHO:
“The problem with Obama, is that we still don’t know very much about what he thinks on foreign policy, so we write in what we want it to be.” ~ A Polish analyst explaining Obama’s wild popularity in his country (quoted from an article by Wesley Pruden, July 22, 2008).
Report comment to moderator
To Anlir #33
People don’t hate or detest Obama. Critics of him just feel he is vastly over-rated (to put it mildly).
If his “father” had been white no one would know or care who Obama is.
Report comment to moderator
#33 Anlir wrote; “Bottom line is that no matter what Obama does or doesn’t do, says or doesn’t say, or where he goes or doesn’t go, he’s gonna get criticized for it on here (and elsewhere).”
Anlir is “shocked, shocked!” What sort of slumber was it that made him miss that this is exactly where President Bush has been with the left and the media for years.
Report comment to moderator
Nick: Obama got 92% of the black votes during the primaries. He was running against Ms. Clinton, the wife of our “first black President”.
Just a reminder here, as I recall, roughly the same percentage of Black voters voted for a White man in the last general election.
And I am dead certain that 90% of your “club” will vote for McCain because he is white.
Report comment to moderator
Well, I’ll have to google Edwards. Hadn’t heard that! I learn so much coming to this blog.
I agree with the Real AJ regarding townhalls. Obama doesn’t like them and refused to do them with McCain. He can’t control them. Perhaps he won’t study for them. I give McCain credit, however, for doing them all over the country. He’s comfortable talking to the people and letting them ask questions. This may not be a glitzy strategy, but he does meet the people and he listens. They’ll remember that.
(And Nick is right. I don’t hate or detest Obama. He’s just got no substance.)
Report comment to moderator
#41, Outkast, “great minds…”
Report comment to moderator
Nick H. Peters is obsessive about Obama’s color and the reading of other people’s minds.
Report comment to moderator
Real AJ, I googled. You’ll have to do better than the National Enquirer.
Report comment to moderator
Here’s the deal: the Republicans are counting on a negative (via Obama) in order for McCain to win. It’s sort of like a football team counting on the other side turning over the ball in order for them come back and win. Yeah, it happens. But the closer you get to the clock running out, the less likely it’s gonna happen. McCain basically wasted the time this spring after he had the nomination sewed up. In and of itself, not fatal, but an error non-the-less.
Also, what is McCain’s message? Ask the average person on the street and they’ll tell you they don’t know. As them what Obama’s is (whether they agree with it or not), and they’ll tell you (”Change” or “Change we can believe in”).
I’m not shocked at all by the treatment Obama receives on here. This being a hyper-partisan Republican site, it’s to be expected. It certainly doesn’t represent most of America though.
Report comment to moderator
NJL,
That was my first reaction when I first saw it yesterday. But now Fox is also reporting on the Enquirer story. The hotel security gaurd confirms it was Edwards, and Police acknowledge that an incident report was filed by the reporters. Do you think they would file a false report on something that wasn’t true? That would be a crime to do. And do you think it would be this quiet in Medialand if it was a Repub?
Check out the Fox link;
http://tinyurl.com/5ftstw
Report comment to moderator
Anlir, with all due respect, the Republicans are not counting on a negative in order for McCain to win. Republicans are counting on a positive. Republicans have to remain optimistic and positive that the spell that has been cast by Obama’s personality and image will be exposed for what it is.
Obama lacks any kind of real substance. McCain offers a long history of substance. Some good and some bad, but you get a clearer picture of what kind of person he really is and what you can expect from him. (Remember, I am no swooning fan of McCain but strictly speaking from the perspective that we only have two “real” choices in this election.)
There is no hiding the fact that if the message is “change” or “change we can believe in,” what is the specific nature of that change?” Promises of more entitlements at taxpayers expense (or even big business or the rich) is not change, it is the same song and dance, smoke and mirrors that the politicians on both sides have been offering all along.
I think there are many who want change, but not the kind that Obama is espousing.
Report comment to moderator
Real AJ
Thanks for the link. It’s right on DRUDGE now, and its the same link you gave, FOX.
If this were a Republican it would be plastered over every paper.
Report comment to moderator
Hi———I am KI’s other half, just to make a comment that many may not be aware of. The “great one” spoke to a great gathering in Berlin, some 200,000 strong, but most of them probably gathered to enjoy the rock groups that were coming through. The same was true of the 70,000 member congregation before his EU tour, they also gathered for a rock group concert. Not all is as it seems.
Report comment to moderator
NOTE: The piece below is on DRUDGE now.
LAT Gags Blogs
Editors ban discussion of Edwards love-child charges.
By Mickey Kaus
Updated Friday, July 25, 2008, at 1:44 PM ET
http://www.slate.com/id/2195914/#latedict
Report comment to moderator
Oh how nice is that? Republicans now consider the National Enquirer as a credible news agency. Talk about desperation!
Report comment to moderator
Anlir its on FOX too.
Report comment to moderator
Faux News and the National Enquirer: the official media outlets of the RNC!
Report comment to moderator
Hmmmm, this seems to be growing wings, and may yet fly. And why would the LATimes ban discussion, even now after Fox has confirmed some of the details? Hmmmm….
Report comment to moderator
PETER LEAVITT: Obama is basically a bargaining black who lacks a solid core of conviction from which to base his political views.
Too many B’s there for belief, buddy. Besides, that’s not the Obama perceived by people who think he’s George Bush 2.0.
And would you please stop saying things like, “lacks a solid core of conviction”? You sound as if you came over from Composites World to help us shop for plywood.
My complaint with him is that he’s not nearly sanguine enough. Good politicians must care more than he does about what voters think. Obama withdraws and shuts down. He blocks out the clammer instead of embracing it (like Bill Clinton). He’s “gnarly to the max,” they say. He’s abstemious, anti-hedonian, brooding, and phlegmatic. He’s a notoriously bad closer, because there’s a voice inside telling him to walk to the door and leave you to call him back.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir,
And don’t forget Fox is the prefered news outlet of the US military. And yes, they have other choices.
Report comment to moderator
This is good satire, very good.
The prostitutes in the media are having to be issued diapers at Obama events – they are all having that wet warm tingling feeling going down their legs everytime he speaks.
There is a lot of mopping up necessary wherever the press corp has been, or underneath ‘news’ anchor desks these days.
Fortunately, intelligent Americans are beginning to shrug off this increasingly ridiculous farce (see latest polls).
Of course, you will always have a core group composed of hard-core leftists, morons, and haters, who cannot think for themselves, and who will slobber after whatever they are told to slobber after. They are loud, they are nasty, they are determined to slander and destroy, and they have no conception of integrity and no sense of commonality with the nation.
It will be interesting to see how large that core group actually is, come November, and just what things they are willing to do in terms of slander and sabatoge, no matter how heinous, both before and after the election, in order to try to silence or intimidate any opposition. I suspect that before the end, whatever the outcome, Obama himself will have to express shame and anger, because of their actions and their virulent hatred, done and spoken in his name.
However, interestingly, that ‘core’ group appears to be shrinking fairly steadily now, as the natural sense of fair play (and basic intelligence) in America is awakened by the gross distortions and lies put out by the Left and its lapdog media machine.
And this process will probably (thankfully) be hastened due to the increasingly frantic, shrill and hating tone taken by the media (and the little Obama soldiers so vocal here and elsewhere) toward anyone who dares to oppose this far left-wing media-manufactured travesty of a campaign. Most Americans will be disgusted.
But the link is very good satire indeed.
Ah, the cardboard Messiah begins to totter and sway and fall apart, even in the gentle breezes of Truth in July.
And those same winds should grow to hurricane force by October.
Report comment to moderator
Real AJ – 72
It’s hard for many people to grasp the fact that FOX is prefered by millions of people, even the US military. There stuck on CNN, the botton on their remote is clued tight.
Report comment to moderator
METANOIA: McCain offers a long history of substance . . . you get a clearer picture of what kind of person he really is and what you can expect
McCain in Toronto Canada June 20: “I am honored by your invitation. There aren’t any electoral votes to be won up here in the middle of a presidential election. But there are many shared interests that require our attention today, and many Canadians here I am proud to call friends.” http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/Speeches/6925c6d4-93fe-4ff4-bfb0-bd1e1aed3c3b.htm
McCain yesterday at the Schmidt Sausage Haus: “Well, I’d love to give a speech in Germany, a political speech, or a speech that maybe the German people would be interested in, but I’d much prefer to do it as president of the United States rather than as a candidate for the office of presidency.”
McCain is a nasty person who will give us a disorderly administration.
Report comment to moderator
Barack Obama is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.
http://tinyurl.com/h4ocb
Report comment to moderator
#75
And just how does your conclusion come from McCain’s quotes? I thought they were pretty nice quotes, so I’m baffled.
Report comment to moderator
Ya know what I love about all this? We’re talking about Obama, not McCain. Obama’s campaign is very good about keeping the focus on their candidate. One can see the frustration of the McCain campaign. Even Faux News can’t help themselves. Heh!
Report comment to moderator
TRS, I wondered about that too. Both MCCain’s points in Canada and the sausage Haus seemed reasonable and decent to me. Going from them to the conclusion that McCain is a nasty person who would run a disorderly administration is rather a non sequitur.
Report comment to moderator
TRS, It’s nasty of McCain to criticize Obama for doing the same thing. It’s disorderly of McCain to speak about important allies incoherently. When you parse his words, McCain is saying that Germans aren’t good enough friends to visit before an election, but he doesn’t realize what his words mean because he’s too resentful to use his brain.
Report comment to moderator
Drill’s posts should really be published. He needs a column all his own.
Okay, I’ll admit the story has legs, and I would like to hope that the LATimes is trying to protect Mrs. Edwards. It’s not as if Edwards will be making public appearances any time soon if this is true.
I agree that the quotes are nice. I wouldn’t describe them as nasty, rather I think they have a humble tone to them.
Report comment to moderator
Re: my point in #78
I have gone back and carefully counted every political story and blog on Worldmag since July 1st through today. Here are the totals:
Stories/blogs about both candidates = 15
Stories/blogs about Obama = 16
Stories/blogs about McCain = 6
Hmmm…
Report comment to moderator
“And such was his attraction, that over 200,000 people trekked in to see him.”
Be more specific; 200,000 socialists. Why do you think he chose Europe? He has no such audience for that kind of socialist dribble in America. The vast majority of America does not care to take marching orders from floundering, Socialist Europe. November will prove that when Obama is embarrassed…
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia; No to pick on you, but you’re one of the few liberals in here; Yes, you’re probably right about 90% plus will vote for McCain, which is reason ten million and ten why Obama has never had a prayer in this election. It’s still inconceivable as to how the dems nominated such an unelectable candidate…
Report comment to moderator
Yesterday Obama showed up in Germany for his Obamafest and the EU announced that Europe had officially fallen into a recession. All he has to do is show up somewhere and they economy instantly goes to pot.
He rushed off to France where he could finally eat something due his station and decided to pass on visiting the wounded soldiers from Iraq and Iran in the closest hospital that takes care of them in Germany. This was after his plane was cleared to land and the soldiers that he would meet agreed to be nice to him on camera under military orders. So nothing changes. He hares soldiers, the military and America, not necessarily in that order – but he loves Frenchie food made by any old smelly Socialist Union Chefs of the lowest order.
Speaking of Obama…eeeerrr…. I mean speaking out of turn, if you had to pick the one person in the world who is alive today that most closely fit the anti-Christ mold, who would that person be
I’m saying right off it ain’t a llama.
Report comment to moderator
One thing we can look forward to this election: our Republican friends arrogantly “bashing” Europe again. And then they wonder why nobody likes America. Yeesh!
Report comment to moderator
LOL, Llama!
Report comment to moderator
nobody likes America
LOLOLOL!
Report comment to moderator
Now that Sarkozy has so warmly embraced Obama I bet our conservative friends turn on Sarkozy. He was a hero to them a few month ago. Guess he’s now a traitorous “Frenchie”.
Report comment to moderator
“nobody likes America”
Slippers getting a bit tight?
Report comment to moderator
Well, you know, Anlir, when even the MSM admits that it writes more articles about Obama, is it a wonder that there are more threads about Obama? Less press coverage on McCain, less to talk about on the blog…..
Report comment to moderator
NJL
LOL, you bet there’s more on Obama. His whole denial of ‘church’ and knowledge of what was ‘bellowed’ from the pulpit was enough to fill dozens of news papers, wires, not to mention hundreds of blogs.
His wife’s remarks, again all the excuses all the coverage, it all makes NEWS, such a surprise!
Then there’s the issue of race – ‘black’ rather than being half black and half white or just saying what describes his ethinic background as ‘mulatto’-
Report comment to moderator
I’m thinking of a t-shirt or bumper sticker:
“Obama is the anti-Christ. I’m still voting for him!”
It’s gonna be so much fun watching the heads explode around here if Obama wins. Heh.
Report comment to moderator
ANLIR: Ya know what I love about all this? We’re talking about Obama, not McCain.
I know how you feel, ANLIR. In order to talk about McCain, I have to force myself. Reporters have loved writing about him for the last decade or so, but I never understood or enjoyed it.
However, I’m a little concerned about the imbalance that you identify, because it furthers the notion that Obama is the fulcrum of the election, which doesn’t work to his advantage with older whites who simply don’t find his merits to be all that compelling and won’t get any kind of emotional pay-back for voting for him, but might get a kick from voting against him. Talking about Obama from now until the election won’t change this dynamic, I fear.
We need to talk a lot more about McCain. The attention won’t be flattering. We need a perpetual motion machine of disparagement to drive up his “negatives.” This might seem easy, because there are so many. but I think we’ll have to drag voters to the trough. And I think voters really need Democrats to play dirty for once.
Report comment to moderator
#52
Photo ops with the military are dog and pony shows. McCain’s “stroll” through a marketplace was an orchestrated campaign appearance. Both candidates use the military as backdrop.
Ironically, it was McCain and the Republican party’s insistence that Obama needs to see the facts on the ground. He makes the trip, the media follows him and the Republicans are annoyed at the attention. They shouldn’t have suggested the trip.
Report comment to moderator
Scroop is right — the lack of attention works to McCain’s benefit, no one notices his gaffes.
Report comment to moderator
This is a thread about Obama. Why wouldn’t we talk about Obama?
Report comment to moderator
Two important images captured the election this week:
1. McCain riding in a golf cart with Bush, the elder.
2. Obama shooting a 3-point basket in front of a crowd of military men and women.
People make mental notes of things like that. And little things like that add up to make a narrative of the 2008 campaign that’s difficult (though not impossible) to change.
No doubt at some point the media will turn their attention to McCain again. I think he still retains a level of good-will among them, though it is greatly overshadowed by the focus on Obama these days.
I think once the conventions are over with, we will see the Democratic Party take McCain on more directly.
Report comment to moderator
HRW: That’s not true. Godlumps/Roaring Lamb reports on all the so-called gaffes. We just ignore him/her, though.
Report comment to moderator
Yeah, that’s just what we need in the White House, Anlir, Someone who can shoot a 3-pointer. That’ll cause the terrorists to run like heck!
Report comment to moderator
“2. Obama shooting a 3-point basket in front of a crowd of military men and women.”
Yeah, that’s something I look for in a president.
Little things like that add up? To what?
Report comment to moderator
NJL,
There isn’t much of record for this guy, so a picture might sub, or at least they can give it a try. Who knows, the DEM’s like pictures. Maybe they feel the shot in the basket can somehow compete with McCains service to our country, his ability to withstand a grueling POW camp, and then all of his achievements in the Senate.
Yep, those shots in the basket…….
Report comment to moderator
…. still don’t add up to much, Victoria!
Report comment to moderator
Anlir says;
“Two important images captured the election this week:
1. McCain riding in a golf cart with Bush, the elder.
2. Obama shooting a 3-point basket in front of a crowd of military men and women.”
My goodness! 2 guys playing golf you say?!! What were the chances of that?!
And way back in #10 I linked to a story with a quote from a soldier in Afghanistan. He states the following;
From the link in 10;
Blackfive got an email yesterday from a soldier in Bagram, Afghanistan that tells what happened when Obama visited the base
“I wanted to share with you what happened. He got off the plan[sic] and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the area to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here at Bagram. As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and didn’t say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell (pretty much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures playing basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk to Soldiers to thank them for their service. So really he was just here to make a showing for the American’s back home that he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you. I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States. I just don’t understand how anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country.”
Your right Anlir, people will remember this. But not in a good way. Let’s break down this Dog and Pony show.
The Pony, Obama. Why he’s was a 3 point shootin’ Stallion, grinnin’ and waving, to the troops while the cameras rolled.
The Dog, US Troops. When the cameras weren’t rolling, he dogged ‘em. Really sad.
Report comment to moderator
NJL, but it means so much to the DEM’s, these photo moments are important….didn’t you know that? LOL I bet some are getting a big one framed to hang over their fireplace.
Report comment to moderator
ANLIR,
You got Sarkozy all wrong. We love the guy. He truly likes Obama and wants to fawn all over him as much as he can knowing how well it will play in the battleground blue collar states where any American loved by any Frenchie is sure to be big headlines.
We love France, Germany, Italy and London where Socialists and Marxist were soundly defeated in the recent elections in each for the first time in decades. It shows that even Europe has had enough of those whack jobs that emptied all the money from their pockets, killed their economy and cause huge unemployment. They saved themselves just in time because the left was going to have all their heads cut off next – by you know who – guys named Barack or something like that that has Islamic terrorist all over it
Satire is a good thing don’t you think?
Report comment to moderator
Real AJ – 107
What a sobering email. Our troops have to observe this sort of treatment from a guy who wants to be their Commander and Chief? What a disgrace.
Report comment to moderator
The negative analysis on here by hyper-partisan Republicans isn’t relevant. The image of Obama making a 3-pointer wasn’t intended for folks who would sooner run over their own mother on the street than vote for Obama. It was important for that wide swath of America who looks more at the man than the party. The two images reinforced a subtle reminder:
McCain = old, the past.
Obama = young, the future.
One could point to other images from the week:
McCain standing in the grocery store attempting to speak and being drowned out by someone making an announcement on the store’s intercom (oblivious to McCain’s presence).
Obama giving a speech in front of a massive crowd at the Victory Column in Berlin, looking every bit Presidential.
One can see the bitterness and jealously dripping from the Republican voices and faces.
Report comment to moderator
AJ
That story has already been debunked. Check out the NY Daily news at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/07/24/2008-07-24_army_officials_refute_claim_of_barack_ob.html
Report comment to moderator
Obama’s speech in Berlin hs convinced me that I could possibly vote for him after all.
…to remake the world once again!
…to heal the planet (a previous speech)!
…to bring us all together and make us get along!
…to re-create peace and make us all harmonious citizens of one world.
And he said he loves America too!
Okay, I’m voting for him, for the Miss America pageant.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir – 109
Who would have guessed you would blither this one on the blog.
PREDICTABLE comment!
Report comment to moderator
So, what are you saying Anlir, that McCain in a real-life supermarket where people are shopping and there’s an intercom someone didn’t think to shut off means is a bad thing?
McCain is out amongst the people, quietly talking to them, making his case.
Obama’s playing basketball, providing an opportunity for soldiers who are bent out of shape with him to email the truth back home to family and friends who will repeat it.
One can see the utter lack of comprehension on the Obamacons.
It’s really hard to not laugh.
Report comment to moderator
Seriously, we don’t need politicians to go on foreign soil and say how American has not always been what we should be but “I love my country…”
No!
How could we NOT love her??? It would be coldly ungrateful to be in Obama’s privilegede position and not love her. But he says he does and that’s fine!
What we need, however, is a politician to go and make a solid and powerful case for America’s greatness!!!
That’s one of the keys to Reagan’s greatness as a communicator (even though, in Germany, many of them protested him with hostility).
Report comment to moderator
The mockery of Obama on here is truly delicious! It represents a lot of things:
1. The serious and credible threat that Obama poses to the Republican reign over the Presidency.
2. A lack of understanding by the Republicans that the American people are tired of the “slash & burn” politics.
3. A real fear amongst Republicans that this time the Democrats have put up a serious contender.
4. Just plain old jealousy and hatred.
There’s more where that came from.
Report comment to moderator
McCain hit Obama hard today on his Iraq positions, to a military audience in Denver.
http://tinyurl.com/6otoda
Report comment to moderator
NOTE: Several quotes below
The SUN
Obama’s brother is in Bracknell
By OLIVER HARVEY
Chief Feature Writer
Saturday, July 26, 2008
HE may be living in a Bracknell council house, but soon he could be dining with his brother at the White House.
The Sun was the first newspaper to track down and speak to Bernard Obama, 37.
And he said of Democrat candidate Barack: “I’m very proud of my big brother.
“It’s quite a funny feeling that he might be the next President of the USA.”
Muslim Bernard — an avid Manchester United fan and Sun reader — is staying with his bingo-loving mum Kezia, 67, who has lived in the Berkshire new town for six years.
“I’m a big Manchester United fan but I think Barack’s more into basketball.”
Bernard converted to Islam 18 years ago. The dad of one said: “I’m a Muslim, I don’t deny it. My father was raised a Muslim.
Report comment to moderator
Unlike the censored and RNC vetted information on Faux News, I saw Obama’s entire speech from Berlin on CSPAN. It was a fine speech. He talked about how America has not always lived up to it’s ideals, but that he loves his country immensely. He also talked about how for over 200 years America has stood for (and fought for) an “idea” – liberty and justice, and that all men are created equal. I would urge people to watch it on CSPAN in it’s entirety.
Report comment to moderator
CB,
OK, I checked your link, and it appears you may be right. I tried the Daily News links to see if I could find the Army statement, but to no avail. I’m gonna check and see if I can find it. But for now it certainly makes the story questionable.
Report comment to moderator
And we would urge you, Anlir, to see past Obama’s fancy rhetoric and look at his record. Oh, I forgot — he doesn’t have one. Not that that has any meaning for you. You said earlier that anyone can say what Obama stands for “change we can believe in.” But when we ask what those changes are, how he will effect them, none of you can answer. What’s more, you are afraid of the questions. Instead, you hand us basketball pictures and hold that out as an accomplishment. Wake up. The man has no experience, but follow the MSM all you want. It’s less thinking. It’s easier.
Report comment to moderator
Of course, plenty of men have assumed the office of President with little (to no) prior national experience. Bush, Clinton, Reagan, and Carter for starters. True, they were all governors, but only Reagan of California would come closest to anything like running a country. Bush and Carter were weak governors. Besides, given the horrendous job that Bush has done the last 8 years, I think the American people are willing to give the new guy a chance.
Report comment to moderator
Bush had more years in office than Obama, so did Clinton, Reagan and even Carter. Those were executive positions and governorships are a good place to obtain that experience.
You really think the American people want to give a total newbie a chance? Well, we won’t know that until November, but it seems that McCain is catching up with Obama despite no positive press. I guess campaigning in the country where the votes are helps.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir,
The Dem’s could have brought men forward who have experience, who are not off in left field with socialist ideas. The guy you support doesn’t have a plan, he dreams away while making speeches, with great swelling words, but its PURE VERBALISM at its worst.
Report comment to moderator
“Executive” experience clearly was no asset for Bush or Carter. Both were a disaster as President.
Polls are meaningless right now. The majority of Americans have not seriously focused yet. The partisans have, but not the great “middle” of America.
Report comment to moderator
I do solemnly swear that if by some miracle Obama is elected, I will do two things on here:
1. Laugh my head off (and mock) the Obama haters every day for a month.
2. Upon his inauguration, question the patriotism and loyalty of anyone who criticizes or disagrees with the sitting President.
Fair is fair.
Report comment to moderator
What we need, however, is a politician to go and make a solid and powerful case for America’s greatness!!!
He did. Obama stated the case and proved it. He also fulfilled George W. Bush’s unrealized ideal of putting some humility on the face of our international image.
Report comment to moderator
NJLAWYER: What had George W. Bush and John McCain amounted to at any equivalent age in Obama’s life?
Despite his arrest for drunken driving, George Bush continued to binge for another decade, even with small children in his home, to the extent that Laura threatened to leave him. Compare that to Obama’s family life.
McCain left his disabled first wife in order to shack up with and eventually marry a woman with a wonderful beer fortune who wouldn’t be capable of earning an average worker’s paycheck, although she was capable of taking his public verbal abuse and humiliation.
Obama got where he is by building the family he didn’t have, without a silver spoon, not by trashing and exploiting family.
Report comment to moderator
116
McCain is still confusing the so-called surge with the so-called Sunni Awakening. The two are separate events and are separated by a few months. The two events were also tactically different, the surge was supposed to bring calm to Baghdad and diplomacy (bribery) was key to Anbar. However, the Shia’s chased the Sunni out of Baghdad thereby achieving peace through religious cleansing, the troops were redundant.
On CNN, McCain now agreed that Maliki’s 16 month timetable was a good idea — Maliki’s timetable is based on Obama’s. What has been achieved in the last few days, and if you read previous threads you will also see the same conclusion, is McCain moving closer to Obama’s position.
Report comment to moderator
Sometimes you’ve got to wonder who is running the McCain campaign;
John McCain will be giving his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on the same night as the first game of the N.F.L. season. I wonder how many people will be watching John McCain, and how many will be watching the champion New York Giants play the Washington Redskins, instead.
In a Time magazine interview Obama was asked the following
TIME:Was there anything that you saw on this trip that changed your mind? John McCain, as you know, is saying, “Well, he already knew what he was going to think before he got there.”
OBAMA: Well, I thought John also suggested that I’m always changing my mind, so he’s got to make up his mind about what he says about my mind.
The man is good
http://tinyurl.com/6e8hr2
Report comment to moderator
Post #125 says everything anyone would ever care to know about our dear homosexual leftist friend Anlir.
Report comment to moderator
Amazing how blind the media are to the slip-slide away from credibility they are on right now.
Report comment to moderator
Sometimes I wonder if the media complainers actually watch the media — their fascination with Obama has been a center of their self absorbed selves — and they’ve actually been quite critical of themselves — the mockery they’ve received from Stewart and Colbert hasn’t hurt.
Report comment to moderator
I am actually going to be very interested if Obama wins office. I figure that the country survived the Clintons, so it will likely survive Obama.
But, what will Liberals do? How will they uphold their constant rhetoric about the downtrodden Black, the poor Liberal, the “evil” Conservatives? If a black, Liberal is in the highest office in the land, then can we really say that there is no true equality in the U.S.?
What will they use for excuses anymore?
Report comment to moderator
TRS
You are bad, you aren’t giving them an ‘out’ — don’t you know they need an excuse to complain? — how can you be so mean? LOL
Report comment to moderator
Another Parallel is that this golden boy wonder wowed a group of temple leaders at age 12, who may have been the same group of cuckoos that murdered him at a mature age.
Report comment to moderator
TRS: Remember Hillary didn’t win. So the sexism angle hasn’t been exhausted enough yet. There’s still room for excuses on that.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria
My Dad is a Christian. Does that make me one? My biological Mom, with whom I had no contact is an animist, does that make me one?
Come on, you have enough legitimate criticisms of Obama without continuing a pretty scurrilous implication that he is not Christian but Muslim.
Report comment to moderator
“Obama got where he is by building the family he didn’t have, without a silver spoon, not by trashing and exploiting family.”
Scroopy, with all due respect, if I take my own life (and no I won’t discuss all the ups and downs), I have accomplished certain things and overcome certain things that Bush, McCain or Obama can’t hold a candle to with no silver spoon, no family connections, etc. — but that doesn’t mean I should be president.
Obama has no record, and a week’s vacation abroad doesn’t give him one.
Report comment to moderator
NJLAWYER, What record did Abraham Lincoln have? He was ILLAWYER. Being of the same party as you, he would vote for you before McBush in a heartbeat.
Two terms in the legislature, one in Congress. A fine speech at the Cooper Union. He knew the law and understood people, and had the right temperament and a transcendental way with words.
McCain is angry, confused, and old. He has a weird smile and wears baseball caps. There’s a chance Republicans will replace him before their convention.
Report comment to moderator
For a debunking of the story about Obama snubbing soldiers posted earlier by AJ
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/afghanistan.asp
Report comment to moderator
HRW — thanks for the link.
one’s first reaction is to be angry at this liar “in service” to his country, “Cpt. Jeffrey S. Porter, Battle Captain, TS Wasatch, American Soldier, (married and father of 6 children).”
Yet one is saddened by his desperate effort to retract. Maybe he is a good soldier burnt out by his deployments, and truly believes the myth that God placed eternal enmity between liberal Democrats and patriotic military personnel. He measured rumors by the yardstick of this antipathy, found them satisfactory, and retailed them as fact to millions of readers in all time.
Cpt. Porter probably is in jeopardy of courts martial. His six kids will pay a cost. He didn’t intend this consequence, so he is really a victim of the kind of people who always patronize this behavior — REAL AJ and the vast wingnut nation.
Report comment to moderator
Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert have spent the entire week ridiculing the media fascination with Obama and Obama’s messiah like persona created by said media. That they have also used the same time to ridicule McCain demonstrates the equal opportunity nature of their satire.
So Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert ridicule both the media and Senator McCain. I didn’t see any mention of them ridiculing Senator Obama, though. Doesn’t sound equal to me.
Report comment to moderator
Ree
Do you watch either comic? They ridicule both candidates in equally funny ways, if you ask me.
Report comment to moderator
Political Punch
ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper
« Obama Says Trip Abroad Might Hurt Him Politically
Microphone Picks Up Private Conversation Between Obama and British Leader on Need for Vacations and ‘Thinking’ Time
July 26, 2008 8:40 AM
At British Parliament today, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, met with Tory Leader David Cameron.
Seemingly unaware of an enormous fuzzy boom mike held by ABC News’ Eric Kerchner, the two chatted casually — and privately.
“You should be on the beach,” Cameron told Obama. “You need a break. Well, you need to be able to keep your head together.”
“That’s exactly right,” Obama said. “And the truth is that we’ve got a bunch of smart people, I think, who know ten times more than we do about the specifics of the topics. And so if what you’re trying to do is micromanage and solve everything then you end up being a dilettante but you have to have enough knowledge to make good judgments about the choices that are presented to you.”
Read the whole piece, very interesting!
Report comment to moderator
The difference between Lincoln and Obama is that Lincoln in his debates with Douglas and others took a firm and rather unpopular position that slavery should not be extended beyond the South. At the time Douglas took a waffling political position that he was neutral on slavery and that the people should be allowed to vote on the issue.
Obama, as the black writer Shelby Steele writes, is a man of malleable principles, viz:
But here lies his essential contradiction: His campaign is more cultural than political. He sells himself more as a cultural breakthrough than as a candidate for office. To be a projection screen for the cultural aspirations of both blacks and whites one must be an invisible man politically. Real world politics, in their mundanity, interrupt cultural projections. And so Mr. Obama’s political invisibility — a charm that can only derive from a lack of deep political convictions — may well serve his cultural appeal, but it also makes him something of a political mess.
Already he has flip-flopped on campaign financing, wire-tapping, gun control, faith-based initiatives, and the terms of withdrawal from Iraq. Those enamored of his cultural potential may say these reversals are an indication of thoughtfulness, or even open-mindedness. But could it be that this is a man who trusted so much in his cultural appeal that the struggles of principle and conscience never seemed quite real to him? His flip-flops belie an almost existential callowness toward principle, as if the very idea of permanent truth is passé, a form of bad taste.
Comparing Lincoln to Obama is an insult to Lincoln.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria
Thanks for that. It is a good thing to have some insight into how candidates think about expert staff and the need to stop and just think. The fellow who is the highest up in my food chain at work has a choc-a-block schedule. He does though set aside time for a) reading what we send him and b) getting briefings from us so that when he has meetings he understands central goals and fundamental points. Its important, I think, for anyone vying for President to understand that they need expert staff around them. One of the things I actually do look at is who is on the senior staff of a candidate, what they write and what their style is.
Report comment to moderator
CB,
Obama isn’t listening to those he believes –
If he did listen and compute the material (that is if they are smarter) would give speeches that had substance rather that dramatic made for movie speeches which are nothing more than verbalism.
Report comment to moderator
CB – 137
If you are referring to post #117, I put that up as information, and Obama’s background. Your parents biological or not, haven’t anything to do with a presidential candidate. If you were running for office of President, most people would want to know who you are and your family, it goes with the territory.
As the rest of Obama’s family you might be interested to know, if you haven’t read about Raila Odinga.
LIVE LEAK
Kenyan Government calls Obama ’stooge’ for Odinga.
Mike Flannery
WHO is Odinga? He is Obama’s cousin.
Report comment to moderator
Good link at #116, AJ.
Report comment to moderator
I thik the verdict is still out regarding the story about Obama snubbing soldiers posted earlier by AJ (see #104 and #140). Sometimes the alleged debunkers can be wrong too, especially when they respod so quickly. I know that some are challenging the alleged debunking, but I don’t know either way.
Report comment to moderator
A more credible story is the one about Obama passing on an opportunity to visit wounded soldiers, and then claiming that the Pentegon told him not to. The Pentegon contests that claim. They did tell Obama that he could not take a campaign cameraq crew, so what’s the use of going?
Report comment to moderator
There are so many posts here that it’s hard to remember what the article was about! As for me, I found the satire rather irreligious and not especially funny. It seems to me that people are enamored with Obama not because they really think that he can do anything (unless they suffer from amnesia from all previous presidential elections) but because he is not even close to Bush. Obama is probably banking of the same fact. It may work for him, but then again he may end up like Howard Dean . . .
Report comment to moderator
Joel
The campaign was paying for that part of the trip — it wasn’t official. I can see why Obama made the choice he did and can see why folks would criticize him.
Victoria,
Two points. First you keep posting ridiculous trip like the Kenya thing. But you have legitimate criticisms you could make, would it not strengthen your argument to make those instead of slinging what is pretty farcical mud?
Second point, he seems to actually be listening to his advisers on places like Afghanistan and on moderating his stance on Iraq and so forth. The speeches are campaign pieces meant to be more fluffy rhetoric than hard policy, for the most part. Most speeches in a campaign are like that and are written not by expert policy staff but by expert campaign staff.
Report comment to moderator
Comparing Lincoln to Obama is an insult to Lincoln.
Yawn. Lincoln cannot be insulted. His personal history has become the history of the world. Nothing can change his fate.
Besides, what we’re doing is comparing Obama and McBush. My point is that Obama’s path into politics, as well as his physical and mental temperament, seems most like Lincoln’s, in contrast with McBush.
For example, both opposed popular American wars, despite the natural weakness of Americans for being seduced into war and the absolute lack of any political advantage in opposing it. Lincoln was turned out of Congress over his opposition to the Mexican War, of course. Obama has been accused of desiring the defeat of the United States.
Obama has emulated Lincoln by giving a number of ambitious speeches aimed at elite audiences. Some things are absolute (theology, for example), but everything in politics and ethics is “malleable”. Lincoln had a gift for stating things otherwise (including things like the Declaration of Independence and the United States itself). Talk about bargaining! Of course, he won some of these bargains and compromises. He also had a mind healthy enough to see reality through the gauze of contrary desires and know when “the bottom is out of the tub.” Contrast that to Bush’s declarations of winning while McCain said we were “failing.”
Obama will be able to see when the bottom is out of the tub.
Report comment to moderator
CB – 153
Obama’s cousin Raila Odinga is important, perhaps not to you. You wouldn’t be commenting on this and trying to sway me away from the Odinga story/stories if they didn’t have weight.
As for your second point – Obama’s speeches have no substance, – your comment — “The speeches are campaign pieces meant to be more fluffy rhetoric than hard policy, for the most part.” — that’s the whole problem CB, that’s ALL Obama blithers, he doesn’t speak about specifics, he doesn’t have a plan, his whole plan is ‘hope’ without a plan, the PLAN is missing. The socialistic views are all Obama offers, it’s all he can come up with, — the money of those who have worked hard, are the very means by which Obama can think and operate, that’s his plan, other peoples money.
His words ARE “fluffy rhetoric” there is no hard policy, or PLAN. How could Obama have a plan, he hasn’t any experience to DRAW from. When you add up lack of EXPERIENCE, lack of PLAN, socialistic values, spending other people money, can’t recall what he heard in church, etc, —– that will appeal to those who don’t work, won’t budget, won’t plan, — it’s Obama’s ‘no plan’ that inspires others to follow him, — why not, they’re looking for a free ride, and Obama is their ticket.
Yes, Obama wants to “REMAKE the WORLD”
Report comment to moderator
Victoria, I like your word “blither.”
I found out about Odinga at ABC.News. They were also talking about Obama’s half-brother and stepmother Kezia who live on the dole in the UK. Apparently, they are Muslims. Do you have anything on that?
Report comment to moderator
Theron writes: “…he may end up like Howard Dean . . .”
No one can end up like Howard Dean. Not even Obama. There can’t possibly be another scream like that.
Report comment to moderator
ScroopMoth, Lincoln, while ambitious, in his whole career adhered to principle. His speeches were a marvel of logic and principle that he then advanced during his presidency.
Obama, as Shelby Steele remarks, in his speeches combines high flown, empty rhetoric with a plethora of flip-flops that are stunning. Many people in our country are catching on to this.
Report comment to moderator
OK, I been digging. I looked last night, and have been again since returning home. Every debunking of the e-mail I can find, is all based on the Daily News saying so. I’ve googled numerous phrases and wordings. You’ll get numerous hits, from numerous sources. But they are all based on the Daily News debunking, none, including Snopes, have any other sources, like an offical statement. I even searched Army press releases and could find no info. I even googled the sources name who told the DN it was false, and get nothing. Although I did find out her myspace page was shut down because she was naughty, like head lice as they put it. But I can find no offical debunking, or a statement made by the woman who supposedly debunked it, other than the DN. If anyone comes across something other than the DN story, let me know. And even if it turns out false, it still doesn’t get him out of his actions to troops in Germany.
And is the soldier who sent it retracting ‘cuz it’s false? Or because he was told to based on Army policy? Hmmmm..
Report comment to moderator
NJL – 156
I posted on Obama’s half brother and Kezia in post 117.
Abongo “Roy” Obama is another half brother who Obama has claimed he is very proud of. He too is Muslem.
Can a past of Islam change the path to president for Obama?
Bill Sammon, The Examiner
2007-01-29 08:00:00.0
Meanwhile, Obama remained sharply critical of what he called “the religious absolutism of the Christian right.”
Report comment to moderator
Victoria
Obama does have policy statements that are easy enough to find for folks interested in substance and interested in debate reality rather than innuendo. You want to keep beating your Obama is a Muslim drum, you do that. You debase your own argument, but that is your choice.
Report comment to moderator
CB, we will see. If it’s inuendo, if there is no substance to what I post, then why do you respond?
Report comment to moderator
To NJL # 157 “No one can end up like Howard Dean. Not even Obama. There can’t possibly be another scream like that.”
By my comment, I didn’t mean that he will scream like Dean. But that in the time leading up to the general election we will continue to see aspects of Obama that may (as that incident did for Dean) give the electorate some serious questions about him (if it hasn’t happened already).
Of course there are many differences between Dean and Obama and Obama has come well through a very stressful primary season. The fact is that Obama is an unknown and many people project a “messiah” image on him (especially in Europe, where thankfully they cannot vote!) not because he has really done anything, but because they are hopeful that he will truly be different than Bush. My hunch is that by election time when the lack of substance behind his rhetoric becomes more apparent, some of the euphoria over his charisma will cease to impress.
Report comment to moderator
Theron, one can only hope you are right. Once the conventions are held and people get down to making the serious choice, once we have some of those “debates,” it may be that people realize that Obama just talks and that there’s no substance behind him — or more to the point, that he doesn’t say what he really has in mind because no one would vote for him if they knew. As someone has noted here, we will get the president we deserve, and if America gets Obama, look out. Just think of Obama, Pelosi and Reid together. When I do, I shudder.
Report comment to moderator
CB, if Obama’s muslim relatives have no bearing on the election, there would be more in the MSM about them. They’ve never hesitated to talk about Jeb Bush or Doro Koch. The Kennedys get all sorts of press.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria
I respond because I think you can do better. That you can address substance. I know you disagree with plenty of Obama’s policy positions and have issues with his relative lack of experience. I guess I’m just tired of the part of American politics that delves so deeply into family relations. With Obama its the Muslim thing. I find equally distasteful the left wingers who go after McCain’s first wife and his present wife’s past struggles. I’m sure you have some relatives that may not reflect well on you — we all do, that’s part of being in a human family.
NJ
See above. If a family member has a prominent position in the campaign, then I think fair game. So potential first ladies, to the extent they campaign, fair game. Kids used in election campaigning, fair game. Brothers, cousins, sisters, what have you not fair game.
Report comment to moderator
Of course the “guilt by association” thing is a time-honored tradition of politics. But I dare say that all of us have family members, friends, and acquaintances that have done or said some pretty awful things. Based on that, none of us, including the two current candidates would be able to stand for election.
There’s a growing weariness on the part of people for these kind of tactics. I think Obama gets it. Our Republican friends, however, apparently don’t.
Report comment to moderator
Its one thing to discuss the relevance of brothers and fathers in the case of political families Kennedys and Bushs but to discuss “cousins” with whom one has only very distant contract is a reach. Especially if these cousins are distant cousins in a large international family.
In watching a rerun of the McCain interview on CNN this morning I was struck by the frequency of the phrase “I know”. When asked for evidence or rationale for his positions, his reply was; I know Maliki, I know war, I know how to win wars, I know people, I know about the economy, I know … , I know … Talk about lack of substance, he expects the American people to accept him on faith alone yet he has demonstrated he doesn’t know basic Asian geography, he doesn’t know religious differences, he doesn’t know how to use a computer, he doesn’t know Czechoslovakia is two countries, he doesn’t know the leaders of Germany and Russia, he doesn’t know the time line of the “Anbar Awakening” in relation to the “surge” etc etec
Report comment to moderator
A story I found interesting;
http://tinyurl.com/6pt8v7
Report comment to moderator
How is this any different from the manner in which evangelicals swooned for George Bush in 2000 and 2004. Bush has also referred to himself and his mission in messianic terms. Why, at that time, were evangelicals not calling George Bush an anti-Christ?
I agree that this aspect of Obama’s campaign rhetoric is troublesome. But it also troubled me in 2000 and 2004 when George Bush did many of the same things.
The only difference is the composition of the crowds who adore the respective candidates. Obama’s messianic rhetoric attracts disaffected 20-somethings. Bush’s messianic rhetoric attracted disaffected 50-somethings and 60-somethings.
Report comment to moderator
CB
YOU WRITE:…”I respond because I think you can do better.”
I do very well when it comes to research CB, when it gets to obvious that the truth is available if one only researchs the Dem’s aren’t happy. Obama’s pastor was the beginning, no one can cover their background when running for the highest office in this land. Ones family, education, beliefs within their family, and church beliefs are of importance to many American’s.
Socialism and Marxism are issues, especially when we look at the religious points which this has come to.
Report comment to moderator
An op-ed piece that coincidently says about the same as my post 168 but with more insight
http://tinyurl.com/5fbdyt
Report comment to moderator
William Lloyd Garrison adhered to principle, Peter.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria — one can not be a marxist, muslim or liberation theology christian at the same time. Pick one to slander him with or you risk contradicting yourself leading people to believe he is none of the above
Report comment to moderator
HRW – 174
What a nonsensical statement, I didn’t say anyone could be all those things at once.
Report comment to moderator
NJL, As someone has noted here, we will get the president we deserve, and if America gets Obama, look out. Just think of Obama, Pelosi and Reid together. When I do, I shudder.
This gets to the heart of the issue. I happen to be the one who remarked that in a democracy Americans get the representatives they deserve at the local, state and national levels. About a month ago, I had the sense that the November elections would result in a Democratic tsunami against the Republicans given the war and the poor record of Congressional Republicans.
At this point, my sense is that while Obama is still slightly ahead, many Americans, though tempted by the siren song of “change we can believe in,” are questioning the bona fides of his candidacy. On Supreme Court appointments and national security issues this is a crucial election. Hopefully moderate and independent voters will see through the fluff of Obama’s candidacy, though frankly I don’t count on this, mainly due to the fact that financial markets have been discounted in the last two months in part due to the realistic assumption that Obama has a good chance of winning. Robert Mundel, the Nobelist economist has warned that if Obama, Reid, and Pelosi succeed in repealing Bush’s tax cuts, most likely a deeep recession woould result.
Report comment to moderator
You are right Victoria it is nonsensical to claim that Obama is all three yet you have posted claims to all three — which slander will you and others be consistent with? If the right continues to paint Obama as one and then an other and then yet an other label, the right’s message become inconsistent, confusing and nonsensical.
Report comment to moderator
A slight point of fact: There is no Nobel prize in economics; an associated prize, The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, was instituted by Sweden’s central bank in 1968 and first awarded in 1969. Mundell won that award for his work on currency exchange rates not tax policy. Mundel has always advocated tax cuts and supply side economics; I would argue that these policies do not increase general prosperity. Beyond that how does he advocate to pay for military spending.
mainly due to the fact that financial markets have been discounted in the last two months in part due to the realistic assumption that Obama has a good chance of winning.
so the sub-prime mortgage crisis, the huge increase in oil prices and the collapse of the US dollar isn’t more influential than a forrcasted Obama win.
Report comment to moderator
One of the sharpest analysts of the European scene is David Pryce Jones who writes in, Obama “or something”, as follows regarding O’s trip abroad:
Every so often, whole populations appear to suspend their powers of judgment and swamp themselves in emotion. It was impossible, for example, to say at the time that the Beatles were mediocre musicians and rather childish in their opinions, or that the late Princess Diana was a seriously troubled young woman causing havoc around her. Senator Barack Obama is similarly whipping up European levels of irrationality. What a phenomenon his tour of the main continental capitals has been! As my friend Josef Joffe, the editor of the German newspaper Die Zeit and a highly rational man, put it, “He’s being celebrated like a victorious Roman general who comes back from the conquest of Gaul or something.”
…Now the BBC correspondent in Washington is someone called Matt Frei. His hall-mark has long been a high-minded contempt for all things American. They brought him over for Obama’s trip, and his reports and body-language suddenly pointed the way to a rational explanation for the flood-tide of emotion. All this Obama mania is only the flip side of anti-Americanism. They’re all hoping for a president who will dismantle everything the United States stands for, and so prove them to be the intellectual and moral superiors they think they are. That may be what Jo Joffe meant when he tagged that enigmatic “or something” on to the end of his great remark.
Anyone who has read Obama’s Dreams of America or Audacity of Hope knows that Obama is basically an angry black man essentially of the sixties era who is distinctly anti=American, however rhetorically skllful.
Report comment to moderator
Who’s “they” ?
Only some 25 years ago, crowds like this had assembled and marched in protest against the stationing in Germany of Cruise missiles to protect the country against the Soviet Union.
And they were right then and probably right now
I especially like the irony that Sarkozy and Blair both friends of Bush and the American right have know become contemptible for meeting with Obama.
Report comment to moderator
Peter
I have both books “Dreams of My Father” and “The Audacity of Hope” –
Two quotes from “Dreams of My Father”
Speaking of Jeremiah Wright,
Report comment to moderator
Obama is basically an angry black man essentially of the sixties
McCain is basically an angry white man essentially of the sixties
Report comment to moderator
Peter Leavitt, you sure come up with some interesting sources. Thanks. D. P. Jone’s notion that Obama mania is “only the flip side of anti-Americanism,” is interesting. There is a lot of anti-Americanism among the youth of Germany and now we hear from our media that Obama has somehow suddenly transformed it to good will toward America. I think that sort of media spin is shallow. Obama did not change their minds at all to make them love us. They simply like Obama because they think he would make us more like them. I hope that does not happen.
Report comment to moderator
Actually, John McCain was formed in the forties and fifties. His grandfather was a brave and distinguished four star Navy admiral in WWII; his father was a four star admiral who commanded the entire Navy in the Pacific, during which time his Navy son, John, was a downed pilot in Vietnam and spent five and a half years in as a prisoner of war, much of it in solitary confinement due to not “cooprating? with his captors.
Obams grew up in the sixties and seventies, the grandson of a Muslim Kenyan grandfather, atheist father, and a leftist anthropologist mother who clearly detested her country
In truth McCain and Obama hail from two rather distinct backgrounds.
Report comment to moderator
Excuse the atrocious spelling on #164.
Report comment to moderator
Yes — one is a member of the elite, tracing his roots to the plantation era of the Old South including slave owners and Confederate State Army officiers, and the other, through hard work and determination, managed to become a candidate for the President of the United States. Yes, Obama has Muslim and Christian ancestors including the Kansas grandmother who you failed to mention but McCain’s family became part of the American elite through slavery — playing the ancestor game is amusing but proves nothing about either candidate.
The important thing is the candidates themselves. And based on the number of factual gaffes in the last few weeks, I would have more confidence in Obama.
Report comment to moderator
I have to back up Victoria’s #171. This Odinga fellow is a socialist, too. I don’t like the connection. We have a right to know what kind of politicians Obama is supporting around the world. I really don’t want any surprises anymore.
The Kennedy’s have been fair game for decades, even the cousins who are not in politics. No one hesitated to talk about Billy Carter or Miss Lillian. You guys are very sensitive about Obama and are trying to control what people talk about. Sorry, but all’s fair, and no one is off limits except Obama’s daughters.
Report comment to moderator
CHRISTIAN TODAY
World
Kenyan Christians could be subjected to Sharia law
19 December 2007, 8:36 (EST)
Raila Odinga, the current frontrunner in the upcoming presidential election in Kenya has promised that he will implement strict Islamic Sharia law if he receives the Muslim vote in the country and is elected president.
A memorandum of understanding (MOU) was signed on 29 August 2007 by Sheikh Abdullahi Abdi, chairman of the National Leaders Forum (Namlef), and Raila Odinga, presidential candidate from the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM).
Despite being signed in late August, the MOU was not made public until 27 November 2007.
However, according to International Christian Concern (ICC) there are in fact two versions of the MOU. Persecution watchdog International Christian Concern claims that a private MOU was signed between Sheikh Abdi and Odinga which is very different from the one presented to the public.
ICC says that in the secret version of the MOU, Odinga, if elected, would “within six months, rewrite the Constitution of Kenya to recognise Sharia as the only true law sanctioned by the Holy Quran for Muslim declared regions”.
LIVE LEAK
Kenyan Government calls Obama ’stooge’ for Odinga.
Mike Flannery
Whereas McCain spent the 1970’s in extra-marital affairs on the winding road to his 1980 divorce and remarriage, and spent the 1980’s receiving $112,000 in technically legal contributions from a fraudulent S&L that he tried to protect from federal regulators, one should not be surprised that The 60’s had some influence on him — more, indeed, than they had on Obama.
There’s still the elephant in the room — the angry white man. You don’t have to be a clinical psychologist to see it. Indecently angry, would be a fair description. The flag on McCain’s lapel is all red.
Report comment to moderator
No the flag on McCain’s lapel is red white and blue. On the other hand, Obama has a tough time getting that pin through his lapel, or is there another reason WHY he doesn’t wear one?
Report comment to moderator
Obama wears a flag pin in the lapel of every suit. All over America, all over the world, on TV and in private meetings, during the entire hour of MTP, and before journalists in Chicago today.
Wingnuts don’t care about the US flag enough to notice its presentation, because wingnuts are blind, even if not sight-impaired.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria
Kenya was a solid one party state for several states. The last election was bitterly fought and violently contested after the official count returned the former president to power. Its wildly believed that the results were fixed which is not surprising since as a one party state corruption was fairly epidemic in Kenyan. For political advantage, the opposition candiate, Odinga, claimed to be Obama’s cousin which was denied by Obama’s uncle in Kenya. They are from the same tribe — If Obama and Odinga are cousins then Obama and Dick Cheney are cousins. Thus the Kenyan government at the time was quick to slander Obama in order to deny Odinga any political advantage and a means for them to attain support from the American right while the Kenyan elections were contested. All politics are local.
As for the Sharia law claim, again Kenyan domestic politics play a role here. Generally speaking, Christians are part of the governing party whereas the Muslims are on the outside. In exchange for the Sheik’s support, Odinga promised to improve conditions for the Muslim minority (only 10% according to the CIA or near a third according to the BBC). By raising the red flag of Sharia law, the governing party hoped to discredit Odinga and receiving American support in the disputed elections.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7176683.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7115387.stm
Report comment to moderator
Victoria
Kenya was a solid one party state for several states. The last election was bitterly fought and violently contested after the official count returned the former president to power. Its wildly believed that the results were fixed which is not surprising since as a one party state corruption was fairly epidemic in Kenyan. For political advantage, the opposition candidate, Odinga, claimed to be Obama’s cousin which was denied by Obama’s uncle in Kenya. They are from the same tribe — If Obama and Odinga are cousins then Obama and Dick Cheney are cousins. Thus the Kenyan government at the time was quick to slander Obama in order to deny Odinga any political advantage and a means for them to attain support from the American right while the Kenyan elections were contested. All politics are local.
As for the Sharia law claim, again Kenyan domestic politics play a role here. Generally speaking, Christians are part of the governing party whereas the Muslims are on the outside. In exchange for the Sheik’s support, Odinga promised to improve conditions for the Muslim minority (only 10% according to the CIA or near a third according to the BBC). By raising the red flag of Sharia law, the governing party hoped to discredit Odinga and receiving American support in the disputed elections.
Report comment to moderator
Now I’ll retry the links
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7176683.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7115387.stm
Report comment to moderator
First sentence should be “several decades”
It seems the links won’t post so cut and paste the following into your server if interested.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7176683.stm
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7115387.stm
Report comment to moderator
Obama Dropped Flag Pin in War Statement
Obama Stops Wearing Flag Pin, Says He’ll Show Patriotism Through Ideas
By DAVID WRIGHT and SUNLEN MILLER
Oct. 4, 2007
An eagle-eyed reporter for the ABC affiliate in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, noticed something missing from Democratic presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama’s, D-Ill., lapels.
“You don’t have the American flag pin on. Is that a fashion statement?” the reporter asked, at the end of a brief interview with Obama on Wednesday. “Those have been on politicians since Sept. 12, 2001.”
“The standard political reply to that question might well have been, “My patriotism speaks for itself.”
But Obama didn’t say that.
Instead the Illinois senator answered the question at length, explaining that he no longer wears such a pin, at least in part, because of the Iraq War.
“You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin,” Obama said. “Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we’re talking about the Iraq War, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest.”
“Instead,” he said, “I’m going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism.”
___SO, if Obama is elected to office and I don’t agree….___
with his politics, his background, experience, his inability to remember what he heard in church I am not obligated to pledge the flag, or respect Obama as the President?
So the American Flag which stands for FREEDOM, etc., is put aside by a man who is running for President because he doesn’t agree with the Iraq war? I don’t agree with much of anything Obama toots, and many other people feel the same way, does that mean we fold our flag, put our flag pins away for four years if this dude beceomes President?
What kind of Presidential condidate would think like this? THINK ABOUT IT!
Report comment to moderator
Not wearing a flag pin is a sign of respect for the flag as the Flag Rules and Regulations forbid the use of the flag as clothing or decoration.
sec 9 http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagcode.htm
http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html
the site has a picture of McCain’s autograph on the flag
more mistakes with the flag from patriotic Americans
http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/wallofshame.htm
As I’m sure you will point out — why would I care? I’m not American and I don’t care but it demostrates the aburdity of the whole flag pin “fiasco” since most Americans including Bush/McCain don’t follow the rules and hence don’t respect the flag.
Report comment to moderator
Not wearing a flag pin is a sign of respect for the flag as the Flag Rules and Regulations forbid the use of the flag as clothing or decoration.
sec 9 http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagcode.htm
http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html
the site has a picture of McCain’s autograph on the flag
more mistakes with the flag from patriotic Americans
http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/wallofshame.htm
As I’m sure you will point out — why would I care? I’m not American and I don’t care but it demonstrates the absurdity of the whole flag pin “fiasco” since most Americans including Bush/McCain don’t follow the rules and hence don’t respect the flag.
The spam filter doesn’t like my links cut and paste if your interested.
Report comment to moderator
HRW,
You do bring comedic laughter when you bring LINKS to tell citizens of this country how to wear a pin.
Give it a break, after all you aren’t a citizen, you don’t live here, etc.,
even YOU understand this, but continue to post silly links.
Report comment to moderator
If you want the world to love you, just criticize America when overseas. Good thing he removed the American flag from the tail of his plane. Oh, and it helps to call the US military baby killers.
Here’s what Obama thinks about the US military:
He brought up Afghanistan and said, “We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.”
There is nothing worse than politicians trying to run a war. Many Marines were killed in Fallujah when Bush told them to go in, wait, die, pull out, go in again, wait, watch the terrorists celebrate, die, pull out, go in again.
With Obama things will be ten times worse. He thinks that US military just bombs innocent civilians. Our soldiers will be made to wait until they are shot before they can fire back. Far more Marines will be killed under this idiot than in the last 8 years. I pray my son isn’t one of them.
Report comment to moderator
Xion,
I join you as you you say “I pray my son isn’t one of them.” Our family has many who are nearing the age to defend this country.
I hope with all my heart that Obama isn’t the President, he hasn’t the background, training, experience or respect to our country, even in regards to wearing a flag pin, to be the Commander and Chief of our Military.
The men in our family, the young boys who are nearing the age of military service, who feel an obligation to serve this country to protect the rights and freedom we all enjoy, should be able to TRUST the Comander and Chief, but Obama respresents none of these traits which we hold dear.
Report comment to moderator
Xion,
I should know better, —– there are women in our family who have served in military service, so to leave them out, embarrasses me, as my cousins have made sacrifice to the United States in war time and otherwise.
SHAME ON ME, I’m sorry to all those I have left out, I should know better.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria falsely asserted that Obama doesn’t wear a flag lapel pin. He does, and she refuses to admit the truth. Why? Obama is producing more TV airtime for flag lapel pins than any other American politician.
Wingnuts have succeeded in dictating a male fashion accessory — one of the things that makes this country great!
Report comment to moderator
Obama DID take the American flag off of his plane.
Obama DID choose not to visit the wounded soldiers in Germany because he couldn’t turn it into a photo op, and because he wanted presidential perks when he isn’t president.
Report comment to moderator
What our Republican friends on here fail to understand is that the politics of personal destruction that they practice is a moral blight on this country. It tears at the foundations of civility and decency that enable Americans to live together in the midst of disagreement. It places the acquisition of political power and their political agenda above the good of the country. It breeds cynicism and hopelessness. That our conservative Christian friends have embraced taking the “low road” is a clear sign they’ve lost their moral compass.
But there is hope in the midst of this muck. More and more Americans are growing weary of the tactics of the right. People are growing disgusted by it and want a more positive and hopeful direction in politics. Will there be enough of them to change the direction of the country in November? It remains to be seen.
Report comment to moderator
Obama visited troops in Kuwait and the Green Zone, without press cameras, as a congressional representative of the the people of the United States. The Armed Forces television (which is not “the press”) covered these official events. Obama’s status changed when he went to Germany on his own dime as a political candidate campaigning for office, no longer representing Congress. At that point, he could not visit troops as a representative of our nation. He could not bring a 4-star general while the press waited outside the gates, without the military declaring the event to be political. This means that injured warriors would have been asked to lend themselves to a campaign event on behalf of somebody trying to get elected. Obama’s costly decision not to use the troops for an official campaign event showed respect to the troops who may not have wished to be inconvenienced by it.
BTW, it has been reported that McCain has cancelled one or more “political” appearances at military facilities.
The American flag is on his plane.
Obama produced more gratifying pro-American exuberation than any American politician since JFK. Obama put the US flag into the hands of thousands and thousands of happy Berliners, while telling them things that Germans don’t want to hear, such as that anti-Americanism is wrong, and Germans must fight harder and hotter in Afghanistan, and help fix the mess in Iraq.
I don’t know what you mean about presidential perks — are you talking about Secret Service?
Report comment to moderator
Actually Obama could have made his scheduled visit to Landstuhl had he not wanted to being the press along, as the followoing L.A. Times account makes clear
That account, however, didn’t square with the Defense Department’s explanation. The Pentagon said it informed the Obama campaign on Monday that he and his Senate staff could visit Landstuhl, where wounded soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan are treated, but that no press would be allowed.
“Sen. Obama is more than welcome to visit Landstuhl or any other military hospital around the world,” said Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary. “But he has to do so, just as any other senator has to do so, in his official capacity. It is not acceptable to do so as a candidate.”
Once Obama learned that the trip had no campaign value, he ditched it.
Report comment to moderator
Obama didn’t have senate staff with him in Germany, because taxpayers don’t pay salaries of people working for him during political events.
Obama wanted to bring a 4-star general with him, leaving the press at the gate, but the military called that “political” too.
Obama reasonably concluded that any kind of a visit to troops in Germany would look political. Opponents could say, “Right, jerk, you want us to believe you went all the way to Germany as a private citizen to visit troops. Did you pay for it out of your own pocket?”
More importantly, Obama didn’t want to subject wounded warriors to the appearance of a political campaign. He didn’t want to drag them into an argument about exploitation. The visit could have inconvenienced troops who didn’t want to participate in a political campaign.
Nothing would have been more stunt-like than a crowd of camera people outside a closed gate, waiting for Obama to return from a secret session with soldiers who sacrificed their strength on the altar of country. But that’s not the worst damage Obama could have inflicted on the troops. He could have dragged the practice of visiting troops into politics. which would have been bad for the country, even if it had “helped” his campaign.
Report comment to moderator
Moth,
With Obama I think it’s a WHOLE LOT OF his being wary of the wounded asking him WHY he can’t understand why they are in Iraq. It’s those hard quesetions Obama steers clear of.
Visiting troops who are in hospital is a thoughtful kind thing to do, especiallly a man who wants to be their Commander and Cheif. But OH NO, Obama has his usual excuses. Or did you help Obama by making them up for him?
Yeah, he had time for a basket ball picture, what a joke! No time for visit’s but a picture he needed ASAP.
EXCUSES, EXCUSES, EXCUSES
Report comment to moderator
#199
Exactly, Victoria you are right once again. The whole fiasco over flags, flag pins, etc is a comedic farce which illustrates depths of absurdity the American right has lowered itself.
#200
Xion, the quote you refer to is a reference to tactics. US military tactics often call for close bombing support often resulting in civilian deaths and coalition deaths. British soldiers were bombed by the US in the first Gulf War and Canadian soldiers have been killed by US air support in Afghanistan. Obama quite rightly points out that Shock and Awe approach doesn’t work in Afghanistan where “boots on the ground” is more effective. McCain and others have basically agreed with him, calling for more troops in Afghanistan. To construe this as a slight against the actual people in the military is to confuse soldiers with the tactics used the US military. Similarly you don’t confuse the teacher with the curriculum.
Report comment to moderator
HRW – 199 –
Twisting words in my posts again, its become your full time trademark here!
Report comment to moderator
Obama takes a senatorial trip to Iraq and Afghanistan at the urging of McCain and his staff. While there he does all the usual things politicians do on such a trip — talk with the generals, politicians, and shake hands with the troops or play ball or eat turkey or …. On the way back he stops in Berlin on a campaign funded trip similar to trips McCain made to Mexico and Canada. Any type of campaigning using the wounded would have aroused severe criticism from the same people who are now criticizing him.
When Obama left for the Middle East, the press was rife with speculation of if and when Obama would make a gaffe. When his trip was so successful, the press and his opponents have been forced to manufacture an incident.
Report comment to moderator
212
Your link doesn’t work.
Victoria you miss my point. The whole debate, the whole issue, the constant harping is the comedic farce. The more you and others post on it the more you contribute to the farce. Whether I live here, there, everywhere or nowhere, the farce remains.
Report comment to moderator
HRW – 214
The LINK in 212 works just fine, perhaps its your PC, or maybe your equipment can’t handle ALL Video’s -
Report comment to moderator
Your link works now previously it said the page didn’t exist.
The video is old news. I’m trying to think of a country, present or historical, in which politicians and civic leaders were virtually required to wear an identifying badge, pin etc. deGualle and the Free French had the Cross of Lorraine but this became a party symbol after the war. Any others come to mind?
Report comment to moderator
HRW, though it’s a stretch for a radical liberal from Canada to understand why patriotic Americans wear flag pins, you might try to understand that after 9-11 many Americans, including for a while Obama, wore those pins to signify their mourning for those who died and determination to fight the jihad enemy. One grows weary of your moralistic lecturing of Americans who care for their country enough to fight their enemies.
Report comment to moderator
EXCUSES, EXCUSES, EXCUSES
Life isn’t as simple as a wingnut mind.
Report comment to moderator
Please don’t call me a liberal, I prefer the term anarcho-socialist in the tradition of George Orwell. As such nationalism which forces uniform fashion choices doesn’t appeal to me — too much like group think for me.
Its rather unfortunate that the present administration forgot who the enemy was and while wearing flag pins, in mourning as you say, choose to invade a country not connected to 9/11. As a neutral observer, you and your friends were used and intimidated into following a party line.
Report comment to moderator
Musing, we went into Iraq because it had continually violated U.N. Resolutions regarding weapons of mass destruction that threatened our interests and those of the Middle East. Also, Pres. Bush was advised by Bernard Lewis, the Princeton scholar of Middle East civilization, and others that Iraq was capable of establishing an Arab form of democracy. Lewis, also, made clear that either we help bring democracy to the Middle East to ease the tensions caused by autocratic rule, or the jihadis would win the hearts and minds of the young people who are capable of destroying the West.
Several bright American and Middle Eastern analysts have remarked that we bid fair to win this war and help to establish democracy in Iraq, in which case Bush over time shall be regarded as the liberator of Iraq and possibly the Middle East, much to the dismay of you and others on the hard left.
Report comment to moderator
Peter Leavitt, the visiting butterfly
. . . we went into Iraq because it had continually violated U.N. Resolutions regarding weapons of mass destruction that threatened our interests and those of the Middle East.
That’s not a just cause for war. Bush could have found out definitively that Iraq had no WMD and was afraid the world was about to find out as much from UN inspectors. Intelligence assessments failed to substantiate a “threat” to the United States.
Only narrow, domineering neocons believed we could drop democracy out of a bomb bay or shoot democracy out of a gun.
Report comment to moderator
Strange title on Obama’s book “The AUDACITY of HOPE” this one translated for Indonesia – edition. VERY interesting.
Report comment to moderator
PETER LEAVITT: #207 Once Obama learned that the trip had no campaign value, he ditched it.
The itinerary said otherwise. The NYTimes reported that reporters were not included in Obama’s original plans to visit the wounded in Germany:
“In any case, had Mr. Obama ended up visiting soldiers . . . he was not planning to take reporters along.”
Report comment to moderator
Nobody has explained how Obama — or any political candidate — can convey gratitude to the troops while conducting a campaign event that by definition is a solicitation for votes. That would be like a “Thank You” card that on the inside begs for money.
Report comment to moderator
SM, something doesn’t compute here. Obama had scheduled a stop at Landstuhl hospital; according to the LA Times article he canceled when told he couldn’t bring any staff or press along.
This is merely another among the many question marks that are more and more being raised about St. Obama.
Paul Krugman, about as left as one can get, wrote a few months ago:
From the beginning, I wondered what Mr. Obama’s soaring rhetoric, his talk of a new politics and declarations that “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for” (waiting for to do what, exactly?) would mean to families troubled by lagging wages, insecure jobs and fear of losing health coverage. The answer, from Ohio and Pennsylvania, seems pretty clear: not much….
Report comment to moderator
The difference between you and Krugman is that he’s really interested in the wonky question marks and you seem to be raising the talk show question marks, which always crowd out the wonky ones. Krugman is afraid Obama will get elected without an explicit mandate to put a lien on Peter Leavitt’s future income stream for mandatory, universal health care. Since you are capable of understanding disputes that take longer than a 10-second sound bite to formulate, you can’t expect me to think you are full of good faith over this story about the snubbing of the wounded.
You are right that something doesn’t compute, but neither does snubbing the troops compute. My speculative guess at the practical explanation for this somewhat baffling incident is that 1.) Obama’s staff carelessly thought a visit was just a visit and not either an official visit or a campaign event, and consequently scheduled a minefield that couldn’t be resolved without a legalistic explanation, and 2.) Obama was too exhausted to walk among the wound-dressers without staff when he needed to prepare himself for his close-up embrace of millions at the Siegessäule — He hoards his energy and doesn’t know how to function when he’s tired. BTW he went to the gym at a different hour of the day than the planned visit with troops.
I’m all in favor of question marks– so let the socratic dialogue start.
Report comment to moderator
P.S. If winning some goodwill for America, made it easier for a chancellor in the future to send more troops to Afghanistan, then O. did a lot of good for our military by going to the Siegssäule instead of to Landstuhl.
Report comment to moderator
Republican Chuck Hagel who traveled with Obama in the Middle East was not impressed with McCain’s ad and felt that Obama made the right decision not to campaign at the German hospital. Hagel stated that Obama and the rest of delegation spent time with the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq but for Obama to meet the wounded would’ve been critized as using the wounded as props.
see http://tinyurl.com/5qorss
Victoria — amusing video — you do realize that publishers and other media companies including film routinely change titles to suit the national audience. Since Obama spent time in Jakarta as a youth, the subtitle would naturally refer to this rather than reclaiming the American dream which doesn’t make sense for Indonesia. As you throw out more and more links and yet don’t defend them — you become a caricature of an angry and confused person throwing up anything and hoping it sticks.
Report comment to moderator
HRW,
Have you read either one of the books Obama wrote?
Report comment to moderator
Its on my list but I refuse to buy books from people still in political office. There are number of things that strike me as wrong about the whole thing even though it appears to be common on the US political scene (I don’t believe Cdn politicians are allowed to have second jobs including writing yet British MPs are known to sit on the boards of major corporations. I will read the book on my next visit to the bookstore or library. I have no air conditioning so I tend to retreat to either one for hours at a time when its hot. Currently I’m over halfway through the God Delusion — an other book I refused to buy simply because all he does is recycle old arguments in the first half of the book but the rhetoric genius of the second half makes it an interesting and quick read. Which one of his books is the better read?
Report comment to moderator
Some interesting stories on the so-called liberal bias in the media.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200807230001?f=h_latest
http://tinyurl.com/6glq23
http://tinyurl.com/6ljpv4
Report comment to moderator
My favorite political comedy team comment on the non-visit; the Red State Update;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cY-2ejfx-U
Report comment to moderator
HRW,
If you haven’t read the books, as you say:
Your comment above gives proof that you know not of what you speak, when you comment on the VIDEO in #228.
A man in political office who writes such books and wishes to be the President of the United States should be on the reading list of all those who vote for him, especially when he has NO PLAN. Now for the rest of you who don’t live in our country, it’s laughable that you would even have a comment to make, you don’t live here, you can’t vote, you haven’t read BO’s books -
Report comment to moderator
I can comment on the translation and retitling of books since that’s a common publishing practise.
Report comment to moderator
Without reading his book one can still comment on his plans vs McCain’s plans.
For example Obama’s plan for the Iraq war is more concrete than McCain who employs weasel words such as time horizon as opposed to timetable. In terms of health care, Obama has put forth his ideas. Look at McCain’s economic plan — its a mental recession! You may not like Obama’s plans but he does have them. Now if you could illuminate me as to McCain’s plan aside from positive thinking, “I know because I know” and drill more (and thanks for the campaign donation Houston), we could debate issues as opposed to your links which you don’t try to defend.
Report comment to moderator
HRW – 235
Pontificating about books you haven’t read, (two books by Obama) won’t read because as you put it, #30 — “Its on my list but I refuse to buy books from people still in political office.”
Report comment to moderator
You said Obama has no plan but I read in my morning newspaper that McCain is criticizing Obama’s economic plan. Its now been established that Obama has a war and economic plan. Instead of saying he has no plan why can’t you critique his plan and argue for McCain’s plan? Does McCain have a plan?
You have yet to defend your Kenyan posts. Why?
You have yet to reply to the defense of Obama by Republican Chuck Hagel. Why?
You see Victoria you throw out rhetorical excess but are unable to defend it and instead resort to throwing up more charges. Its an interesting method of debate in which your opponent is forced on the defensive as you change from one topic to an other yet your method only sustains itself on the surface. Beyond the initial post/link you are unable to sustain the argument coherently and have to resort to a change of topic to keep up.
Defend your statements;
– He has Kenyan cousin who wants to institute sharia law
– He has no plan (you will discover like Hussian that its near impossible to prove a negative)
– He deliberately evade a hospital visit because it wouldn’t help his campaign.
Report comment to moderator
HRW: Its an interesting method of debate
Victoria’s a slang-whanger. Her thang comes from websites like NewsMax that feature non-prescription boner pill ads. Her rhetorical methods are the perfect reflection of her virtue and your wickedness.
Report comment to moderator
HRW – 237
I have brought forth much evidence to support the Odinga/Kenya situation, because you don’t like it, or don’t/won’t believe the news reports from many sources, which I’ve posted doesn’t mean a thing, you have chosen not to believe.
You can’t comment on the two books written by Obama because as your lame reason to claim WHY you haven’t, #230 — “Its on my list but I refuse to buy books from people still in political office.” — This obviously is a sore spot, because you don’t know what the books say, you can’t keep up.
So now the barrage of questions such as Hagel, which you posted not to me, but in general. #228.
You now play switch and bait hoping your lack of understanding, lame reason for not reading the books will somehow provide a cozy little place for you to sit
asking ‘busy questions’ -
Report comment to moderator
I refuted the Kenyan articles you linked. You have yet to reply to the refutation so I take it you realize my reasoning is correct.
Discussing whether I know the contents of a book of which only the title was discussed is a bait and switch (you have the order wrong – first you bait and then you switch).
The Hagel video pertains to a discussion of which you and others were part of but once you post your opinion or links you like to move on avoiding an honest discussion of the issues. To engage in a debate you need to answer back those who refute your original statements. My three points at the bottom of 237 is my understanding of three points you made on this thread. For each statement, I have provided contrary evidence or a logical argument against your interpretation. I now await your reply to my arguments.
Report comment to moderator
HRW,
Which Hagel Video are you talking about, would you direct me to the EXACT post.
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!