Amen to the centrists. This Marxist Obama will set us up for some reparation program to reward the most financially successful black community in the world. The constant whining regarding their “plight” is nauseating. Working hard and smart is not on the agenda. McCain in ‘08!!!
I didn’t know that many Obama supporters read Powerline. Most of the people who post here strike me as being a bit brighter than average.
I can’t see how anyone but the young and naive, the uninformed or the misinformed could take Obama seriously.
I suppose it could be some sort of organized effort to create the impression that Obama has more support than he really does. Does anyone else think so?
It does seem like something’s up.
The media want him. Superdelegates want him. Yet Hillary has very effectively shown where his electability issues are. That’s one disconnect. His supporters, primarily Blacks, refuse to see his weaknesses. Ironically, Obama admits his faults, while his fans refuse to. Another disconnect.
Ultimately, Americans will decide whether he’s fit to be president. I cannot see their electing him. I honestly can’t.
It’s not that non-leftists will be electing Obama, but that they will be voting against McCain. The best thing Obama has going for him is that he is not McCain. McCain will lose the election because he is McCain and is not liked, trusted nor respected.
Right...and they’ll all vote for a far-left liberal. Somehow I doubt it.
I did not state it clearly, but I was not talking about voting for Obama, just not voting for McCain, at least for some on the right. Moderates will trend toward Obama because they will not see him for the far left liberal he is, thanks to the MSM and media blitz that will portray him as very normal.
Obviously we also know they will highlight the worst of McCain, which is unfortunately not hard to do, given his flaws. The middling masses will vote more toward Obama than McCain, just like they will go to a movie with a lot of positive buzz. If McCain wants to win, he is going to have to turn out boat loads of older white men and women Americans who are not leftists. Rather hard to do when you have a campaign without infrastructure, funding, a grass roots organization or a charming energized enthusiastic candidate.
If McCain wants to win, he is going to have to turn out boat loads of older white men and women Americans who are not leftists. Rather hard to do when you have a campaign without infrastructure, funding, a grass roots organization or a charming energized enthusiastic candidate.
Heh… doubtful. I’m no McCain fan, and indeed, I am so ticked off at McCain’s carrying the Republican banner that like Hannity, I’ve filed with my local board of elections to change my status from Republican to the Conservative party. Nevertheless, come November, I’ll hold my nose and vote for McCain.
I did not state it clearly, but I was not talking about voting for Obama, just not voting for McCain, at least for some on the right. Moderates will trend toward Obama because they will not see him for the far left liberal he is, thanks to the MSM and media blitz that will portray him as very normal.
Obviously we also know they will highlight the worst of McCain, which is unfortunately not hard to do, given his flaws. The middling masses will vote more toward Obama than McCain, just like they will go to a movie with a lot of positive buzz. If McCain wants to win, he is going to have to turn out boat loads of older white men and women Americans who are not leftists. Rather hard to do when you have a campaign without infrastructure, funding, a grass roots organization or a charming energized enthusiastic candidate.
Ironically, the MSM has a quandary with regard to McCain. If they play up the “scary conservative” side (pro-life, supports the war, strict Constitutionalist judges), the die-hard conservatives who vow to sit out the election might come around and get out to vote for him. If the MSM’s plays up the “maverick Republican” in an effort to discourage Conservatives (Gang of 14, immigration, torture), moderates and independents will go “hey, you mean he’s not the ultra-Conservative Antichrist that everyone’s made him out to be?”
Of course, McCain’s appearance before the cameras for the past 8 years (to the Republicans’ benefit or detriment depending on the issue and your views) means that a lot of people already know him and have an opinion, so spinning in any direction is going to be a challenge.
Anecdotally, my brother, a registered Democrat, has already indicated his intention to vote for McCain (back when both Hillary and Obama were still contending for the Dem nomination). He realizes that the most important issue right now is national security and our standing in the world, and he doesn’t buy into the “Come let us reason together...” approach that Obama has been promoting.
Ironically, the MSM has a quandary with regard to McCain. If they play up the “scary conservative” side (pro-life, supports the war, strict Constitutionalist judges), the die-hard conservatives who vow to sit out the election might come around and get out to vote for him. If the MSM’s plays up the “maverick Republican” in an effort to discourage Conservatives (Gang of 14, immigration, torture), moderates and independents will go “hey, you mean he’s not the ultra-Conservative Antichrist that everyone’s made him out to be?”
Of course, McCain’s appearance before the cameras for the past 8 years (to the Republicans’ benefit or detriment depending on the issue and your views) means that a lot of people already know him and have an opinion, so spinning in any direction is going to be a challenge.
Anecdotally, my brother, a registered Democrat, has already indicated his intention to vote for McCain (back when both Hillary and Obama were still contending for the Dem nomination). He realizes that the most important issue right now is national security and our standing in the world, and he doesn’t buy into the “Come let us reason together...” approach that Obama has been promoting.
Very good points and food for thought, Relish. (food pun, haha)
You are correct, for many McCain is a known brand (at least they think they know him).
You are also correct the MSM will have to walk a fine line when attempting to torpedo him. I think the MSM will highlight negatives about McCain that will play to moderates, but not instigate conservatives. Examples, his temperament, hypocrisy, age, poor treatment of others, etc..
I too have a couple of moderate democratic relatives who would have voted for Clinton. Now they are saying they will vote for “Mavrick” McCain due to Obama’s very thin experience, his lack of content, their concerns over national security, and Obama’s wife and posse of agitators/terrorists. I also think they are rather angry about the treatment of Clinton by some in their party.
Here have strayed from the original topic, let’s reel it back in, shall we? To make this thread about John McCain is to diminish the bitter, hateful, anti-American ideals of The African Queen Bitchelle Obama. THIS is just ONE of the posts that sum her up fairly well:
Jim M - 06 May 2008 10:08 AM
Michelle Obama is beyond bitter. She absolutely oozes the meme of black liberation theology and cannot withhold the frustration she feels.
Michelle Obama is both a disciple of black liberation theology and a lifelong beneficiary of affirmative action. She has been handed opportunity after opportunity based not on her character and abilities but on the color of her skin. She is not encountering an affirmative action-free zone - a run for the presidency - and she is having great difficulty coping with life without the boost.
The more I see of Mrs. Obama, the more I am convinced that she was a member of Trinity Church long before she met her husband. Her ties to radicals the likes of Bernadette Dohrn reveals a personna of an anti-American.
By her own admission, she did not have the academic qualifications to matriculate to Princeton. Her advisors told her not to waste her time. Yet she was admitted to Priceton.
If her Thesis is any indication of her academic prowess, she was not a candidate for admission to Harvard Law. Yet she was accepted there.
Her future credentials were given the Ivy League polish to launch a successful career, yet it was not enough. She now rails about the debt she incurred along the way.
Those of us who went to both college and law school had choices to make. In my own situation, I discounted Ivy League schools not because of my academic performance but due to the cost. Being a white male from a large middle class family, I was not a candidate for financial aid of any type. The costs associated with an Ivy League education were as out of reach for me as an Italian sports car. I chose institutions that I could afford and would not crush me with future debt. That is not to say that I did not have to borrow money - I did, and it took 10 years to pay back. But I never once complained about the debt - the education I received was worth it to me.
Michelle Obama’s education is not worth much to her. She did not have to work for it like most other people. She was handed opportunities out of reach for the vast majority of people. Yet she is bitter. When you are given something, it does not quite have the same meaning to you as something that you worked hard to get.
But that has been the story of Michelle Obama. Glorious opportunities handed to her based on pigment. But black liberation theology tells her it is no even close to settling a 400 year old debt. She is owed. She is entitled. She is oppressed.
The race for president looks to be Mrs. Obama’s first foray outside of the affirmative action world. She talks constantly of having the bar moved. That is like a football coach complaining that the other team is not running the same play all the time.
Welcome to reality, Michelle. Welcome to the real world.
I too have a couple of moderate democratic relatives who would have voted for Clinton. Now they are saying they will vote for “Mavrick” McCain due to Obama’s very thin experience, his lack of content, their concerns over national security, and Obama’s wife and posse of agitators/terrorists.
That area underlined is a very big reason the moderate democrats I know will not vote for him. Begula (whatever his name is) was right, they have the Dukakis coalition of eggheads and AA’s. The more the R’s can stick negative characters to O’s character, like his own chosen lifemate, the more he will sink in the polls with the moderates.
And I’m sure Mrs. Obama is also bitter about all of the criticism heaped upon “her” pastor, Reverend Wright, during the past month....
I believe you are absolutely correct. If anyone had any question as to whether Michelle Obama was an ardent follower of Jeremiah Wright, they need only look at her demeanor over the last couple of weeks.
On at least two public occasions in appearances with Barak, she was given the opportunity to comment on the Wright controversy. On the first occasion, Barak spoke of how Wright’s views did not reflect his own beliefs. He then asked his wife if she would like to speak, as if passing a cue to her to recite a rehearsed speech. Mrs. Obama refused to comment, which caused her husband to mutter something to the effect that he was certain she had something to add, but perhaps enough had been said on the subject.
The second occasion was just this week on one of the morning news shows. When asked point blank about her views on Wright, she deflected answering the question with the old bromide that it was really time to move on.
To my knowledge, Michelle Obama has never made any public statement condemning Jeremiah Wright, his words or his beliefs. None. When she has had the perfect opportunities to weigh in and support her husband’s views, she has refused comment. Based on her speeches and her derisive comments regarding the US, it is not unreasonable to conclude that Michelle Obama is a ardent supporter of Jeremiah Wright who believes what Wright believes. She will not publicly condemn his words because she cannot condemn them. She is a loyal disciple of black liberation theology, and her beliefs in that regard are clearly revealed in her words and deeds.
On the subject of Michelle Obama’s beliefs, part of a comment I made on The Friends of Barak Omaba (Part 3)seems particularly relevant here:
...Michelle Obama was an associate at the law firm of Sidley Austin in the late 1980’s. Given the fact that these large law firms typically hire associates based on their summer intern programs, it is likely that she was an intern at the firm before she graduated from law school.
Barak came on as a summer associate at Sidley Austin in 1988. Michelle Robinson was assigned as his “mentor” at the firm.
Also employed at Sidley Austin in 1988 - Bernadette Dohrn. One wonders whether Dohrn was Michelle’s “mentor”.
Dohrn went to work at Northwestern University after working at the law firm. Bill Ayers father was on the board there. Northwestern hired Michelle Obama’s brother as its assistant basketball coach. Michelle Obama was one of the original faculty members at the Asset-Based Community Development Institute at Northwestern University.
It was Michelle Obama who organized a few of the speaking panels on which Barak and Ayers appeared together. I find myself more and more questioning whether Michelle Obama was a member of Trinity before Barak joined the Church. She, being a lifelong resident of Southside Chicago, certainly carries the persona of someone who has been a lifelong member of that church....
The more we learn about Michelle Obama, the more it appears that there is ample evidence to support the conclusion that her present beliefs and views are consistent with her past associations of a more radical nature. And perhaps Barak’s introduction and acceptance into the inner circle of Chicago’s Marxist elite was a form of liberal “dowry”.
I can already see Barak and Bitchelle in the White House and the pain in the äss that’ll be for the Secret Service. They’ll have to construct some special receptacles at the entrances for the FOBBs -
(Friends of Barak and Bitchelle)
- Thick safes for explosive devices and firearms to be used when their pals visit.
While we’re on the subject, let’s not forget that Michelle Obama is not beyond engaging in a little fear-mongering of her own, nor rendering a medical opinion to support her views:
From:
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 7:41 AM
Subject: A Message from Michelle Obama
February 17, 2004
Dear Friends:
We have all been concerned lately with the rise of conservatism in this country, especially as it relates to women. You’ve read the alarming news about the Justice Department’s request for hospitals to turn over the private medical records of dozens of patients. This cynical ploy is designed to intimidate a group of physicians and force them to drop their lawsuit seeking to have the so-called partial birth abortion ban ruled unconstitutional.
The fact remains, with no provision to protect the health of the mother, this ban on a legitimate medical procedure is clearly unconstitutional and must be overturned. Attorney General Ashcroft and president Bush believe so zealously in their cause that the privacy rights of patients are under assault. They believe we have no federal right to privacy when it concerns our medical histories.
On March 16th, we have a chance to nominate a candidate who will be tireless in the fight to protect women. It isn’t simply about the right to choose, or privacy rights. It is about pay equity, about ending domestic violence, promoting health care around the world, and letting doctors decide treatment options, not federal judges.
It goes without saying that we must win back the U.S. Senate and hold our ground as a check against the right-wing executive branch. Illinois will be a key battleground and your vote is critical.
My husband has stood up for women time and again, and I am proud of his record. He understands that casting a vote on the floor of the Senate takes greater courage than issuing a position paper. Oftentimes, a well intentioned law is in fact a flawed law. That’s why it is critical we nominate someone who has faced these tough choices. That’s why nominating an experienced legislator is so important in this race. It takes courage to cast a vote.
Who among the Democrats running has a proven record? Who among the candidates running for the Senate in Illinois has stood up to the right wing politicians and voted against their agenda? Who can we count on to keep the Bush/Ashcroft team from appointing the Supreme Court Justice that will vote against Roe v. Wade?
Please join me in sending a message of unity and strength by attending the Women for Obama Luncheon on February 23rd at the Hyatt Regency. Lunch costs $150 and includes remarks from our friends the Reverend Willie Barrow and Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky. To reserve your seat please call the campaign office headquarters at 312-427-6400 or log on to the Obama for Illinois Website.
I urge you to stand with me and support my husband at this event. You know the stakes have never been higher and we can’t depend on untested amateurs and administrators in this fight. Barack is a fighter and he will be a champion we can be proud of.
Thanks you so much for all of your support.
Signature: Michelle Obama
Also, given her legal analysis and conclusion that “this ban on a legitimate medical procedure is clearly unconstitutional and must be overturned”, perhaps we now have an answer as to why she gave up the practice of law.
Jim M - “Also, given her legal analysis and conclusion that “this ban on a legitimate medical procedure is clearly unconstitutional and must be overturned”, perhaps we now have an answer as to why she gave up the practice of law.”
Why Should ...
An affirmative action baby work when she can be paid $330k per year to sit on a “board” that meets a few times per year?
It seems to me that she is just a far left version of Hillary Clinton. She TOO hitched HER future to a man of dubious judgment who wanted to climb the political ladder - at all cost - no matter the consequences to the country.
The sheer size of the combined, errant egos of Barak Hussein Obama and his arrogant wife Mitchelle is stunning in its enormity.
Michelle evinces a typical characteristic of many black women in America: fixed intense anger as the organizing force of her personality.
I saw late last night on CSPAN the entire Michelle Obama speech of which I had seen just a 60 second clip earlier in the evening on YouTube. In that brief clip which I watched on my computer, without great video and sound, I didn’t pick up what was all too plain on tv--Michelle O’s anger, her unceasing anger at America, her unchanging emotional negativity, even where she said that for the first time in her adult life she feels “really proud” of America, because people are coming together.
Even in her “pride,” she still projected bitterness and a sense of grievance.
Maybe she just needs to get laid by a REAL man and not just another “empty” suit?
