Obama’s problem associations with Wright, Rezko, and Ayers have really got the creative juices flowing on the left as they twist themselves into rhetorical and intellectual pretzels trying to downplay or dismiss, their candidate’s monumentally poor judgement in hanging around with these folks for much of his adult life.
Some may read this apologia for Obama’s associations from Reed Hundt at TPM Cafe and shake their heads in wonderment at the cluelessness of the author. Others may marvel at the sheer brazenness of Hundt’s dismissive comments about Ayers and Wright, admiring the guts it took to reveal oneself as an idiot.
Still others may laugh at the appellation “Swiftboating” as a descriptive for people who tell the truth about what Wright and Ayers have sermonized and accomplished in the past that makes them such problematic friends. Even the candidate has accepted as true what these hateful FOO’s (Friends of Obama) have said and done thus making the charge “Swiftboating” Obama pretty silly – as if the candidate would “Swiftboat” himself.
But as an anthropological exhibit showing an utter lack of honesty and integrity by the left in commenting about people that ordinary Americans find despicable, Hundt nails it:
It ought to be beneath senator McCain to have his side label Obama as a terrible person because he has failed to shun a fellow who did wrong 40 years or is not a patriot because he neglected to wear a flag on lapel, or declined to disavow a Korean War vet and pastor because he spoke too harshly one Sunday. McCain went to Vietnam to re-open peaceful relations, so he knows the place of forgiveness. He is a man of military honor and knows how to respect a friend and a foe. Hence, it ought to be beneath McCain to tolerate attacks against Obama that closely resemble the despicable charges bush launched against McCain in South Carolina in 2000. It should be the case that mccain doesn’t just pretend to stop these attacks, but actually does so. Aside from his laissez-faire positions on iraq and the economy, McCain’s primary disqualification for the oval office is that he knows these vile, crazy attacks are wrong for America but he won’t stop them.
Hundt has walked the bases loaded and set the ball on a tee for me to hit. Far be it for me to not oblige him.
“...he has failed to shun a fellow who did wrong 40 years…”
Yes, some may think trying to blow up the Pentagon is “wrong” although many more people might also believe that carrying out that act of barbarism and to this day not regretting it (indeed, wishing to have tried to commit more mayhem) puts such an individual beyond the pale of ordinary society. Most would agree that we should consign unapologetic miscreants like Ayers to the outer darkness where only criminals and radical wackos (and liberal universities) will have dealings with him.
Instead, Hundt believes we are “swiftboating” Obama by pointing out in the Age of Terror that our President being on a first name basis with an unrepentant terrorist is probably a bad example to set and causes most Americans with half a brain to wonder “What is that guy doing with William Ayers?”
For in truth, Ayers has not only not repented his criminal acts, he still holds views of America that are so outside the mainstream – hateful and laughably adolescent views they are – that carrying on a long term friendship with this lout calls into question not only Obama’s judgement but his sanity as well. Indeed, his campaign said after the ABC debate that Ayers and his wife, fellow former terrorist Bernadine Dohrn were “respectable fixtures of the mainstream in Chicago.”
Ayers most recent pronouncements (and Dohrns) are contained on some audio tapes dug up by a small radio station in Chicago and blasted over the internet on Wednesday by Powerline and Hugh Hewitt. The tapes show that Ayers and Dorhn are in the mainstream of Chicago politics only if Josef Stalin is mayor and Pol Pot is Cook County Commissioner.
This would come as a surprise to Mayor Daley who also has had kind words to say about Ayers/Dorhn – no doubt because he doesn’t wish to anger the liberals in Hyde Park and because he has a sneaking admiration for the former terrorist’s chutzpah. Daley is also a crook who gets away with his crimes which at least gives him something in common with Ayers. There is no excuse for Obama.
Hundt knows all of this and yet chooses to dismiss Obama’s association with Ayers in a way that suggests we shouldn’t be beastly to the candidate for hanging around with an ex-shoplifter. Pardon my gas but that fart ain’t stinkin’.
“...or declined to disavow a Korean War vet and pastor because he spoke too harshly one Sunday…”
First, I would ask my readers with an IQ above 60 to stop screaming at your monitor. Mr. Hundt can’t hear you and you are disturbing the dog who thankfully, can’t read what this monumentally dishonest and royally idiotic liberal has written about Jeremiah Wright. Otherwise, your beloved pooch might jump up on your desk and urinate on the screen -which is better than Hundt’s ridiculous notion of Wright’s rantings deserve.
Yes, everyone knows that Reverend Wright did quite a bit more than “speak harshly” about America, about whites, about Jews, and just about anyone else who this misanthropic nincompoop railed against in his sermons. If Hundt believes Wright saying “Not God Bless America but God Damn America” to be only “speaking harshly,” I would hate to see how he would categorize some of Bin Laden’s diatribes. Perhaps Osama is “just letting off steam” or maybe he’s “remonstrating” against the US.
Wright, of course, is a bigoted, America hating, anti-Semitic, nut case who believes AIDS was invented by the government to kill black people. And questioning Obama’s knowledge of his “Spiritual Advisor’s” outrageously hateful and despicable views is extremely relevant in that the candidate has denied being aware either in public or private that his pastor held to these positions.
If found otherwise, Obama is a bald faced liar. And it would appear just looking at what Tom Blumer has been able to come up with that either Obama looked the American people in the eye during his speech in Philadelphia and lied through his teeth or he was asleep during Wright’s sermons and never read any of the Trinity Church bulletins or purchased any tapes of his unbalanced pastor’s talks.
Blumer, by the way, makes a compelling case that Obama was wide awake during the services, went so far as to take notes of Wright’s sermons in the space provided by the church bulletin, and purchased at least one tape of Wright’s talks.
When Hundt makes his stupidly dishonest point that Wright preached his hate mongering only “one Sunday” he is either ignorant or is clumsily trying to excuse Obama’s incredible lack of judgement in continuing his association with a man the vast majority of Americans would have shunned like the plague after only one of his outbursts.
Instead, the candidate spent 20 years absorbing a worldview so at odds with the reality that is America that one can legitimately question Obama’s gut feelings about this country. This may anger the left but most of the rest of us see questioning Obama’s beliefs about America as a logical and reasonable outgrowth of the importance the candidate himself places on his relationship with Wright.
And this brings us to the essence of why Ayers, Wright, Rezko, Auchi, and other FOO’s are legitimate campaign issues; Obama’s claim that despite his lack of experience, it is his superior “judgement” that should recommend him to the American people. Obama conveniently tags questions about his associations as “distractions.” But are they?
With that, Obama identified the new public enemy: the “distractions” foisted upon a pliable electorate by the malevolent forces of the status quo, i.e., those who might wish to see someone else become president next January. “It’s easy to get caught up in the distractions and the silliness and the tit for tat that consumes our politics” and “trivializes the profound issues” that face our country, he warned sternly. These must be resisted.Why? Because Obama understands that the real threat to his candidacy is less Hillary Clinton and John McCain than his own character and cultural attitudes. He came out of nowhere with his autobiography already written, then saw it embellished daily by the hagiographic coverage and kid-gloves questioning of a supine press. (Which is why those “Saturday Night Live” parodies were so devastatingly effective.)
Then came the three amigos: Tony Rezko, the indicted fixer; Jeremiah Wright, the racist reverend; William Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist. And then Obama’s own anthropological observation that “bitter” working-class whites cling to guns and religion because they misapprehend their real class interests.
In the now-famous Pennsylvania debate, Obama had extreme difficulty answering questions about these associations and attitudes. The difficulty is understandable. Some of the contradictions are inexplicable. How does one explain campaigning throughout 2007 on a platform of transcending racial divisions, while in that same year contributing $26,000 to a church whose pastor incites race hatred?
You explain it either one of two way; towering hypocrisy or a disconnect from the way things are percieved outside of his own narrow, elitist social circles. I lean toward the latter but don’t dismiss the former. And this gets to the issue of Obama’s “judgement” that Ed Morrissey handles quite nicely:
Remember that one of the campaign slogans for Obama was “Judgment to Lead”. I often use the picture of Obama with that slogan on the lectern just to emphasize that Obama himself opened the debate over his judgment. Now that people want to start asking about the judgment he claims as his superior quality for the election, he wants to label it a “distraction”, but without it he has nothing else to offer except three undistinguished years as a backbencher in the Senate.With no track record of legislative accomplishments and no evidence of any real engagement in change, judgment would have eventually become a focal issue for Obama anyway, even if he hadn’t brought it up himself. That means his judgment in launching his political career at the home of an unrepentant terrorist like William Ayers becomes relevant and germane, especially since the political connections between the two continued after Ayers announced that he wished he’d gone further in his political violence. Even in 2007, Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn talk about overthrowing the “corporate government” of the United States, to replace it with something more akin to Red China.
What is Obama’s judgment on Ayers and Dohrn? They’re “respectable figures of the mainstream in Chicago.”
The left will continue to downplay, dismiss, or just plain lie about Obama’s associations and why they are important. But as revelations continue to bubble up from the murky depths of American radicalism about these two characters and others, questions about Obama’s judgement, his core beliefs, his honesty and integrity, and how he feels about the rest of us will continue to be raised.
I would say to Mr. Hundt that this is not “Swiftboating” – not by any means. If by using that term you imply that Obama is being falsely accused you are greatly mistaken. Accusations based on audio and video evidence that slaps ordinary Americans in the face with their virulent hatred and radical chic doctrines do more to undermine your candidate than anything Hillary Clinton, John McCain, or the right wing “noise machine” could ever do.
2:24 pm
As Mr. T said:
“I pity the FOOs!”
2:45 pm
For the Left, “Swiftboating” has morphed into a shorthand for confronting a Democratic candidate with uncomfortable, unpopular facts about his or her past. Far from a smear, it goes to the heart of what this person’s political instincts are, what his affinities tend to be and what his worldview consists of outside the neatly-packaged talking points of the burning issues of the day.
For Obama, it tells me that he is entirely too comfortable with people who see America as an almost unalloyed evil. For the one person who is sworn to protect our nation from enemies both foreign and domestic, this does not fill me with confidence.
2:53 pm
Excellent piece.
I hate the way the term “swiftboating” has come to mean an unfair, untrue attack on a saintly crusader who stands head and shoulders over the rest of us and thus must be taken down by evil worms crawling in the muck.
Even more depressing is the fact that half the country falls in love with gaseous, utterly phony jackasses like John Kerry and Barack Obama.
2:53 pm
To me, nobody can state the case better than does the incredible Dr. K.! The man is a true national treasure.
3:01 pm
I like the fisking here but I think it is a mistake to tacitly agree to the term “swiftboating” to mean “making false accusations about a candidate.” The Swift Boat Veterans, to my knowledge, have never actually been rebutted by Kerry. Kerry dismissed them and acted offended and shocked, whatever, but that doesn’t mean the Veterans were making false accusations.
Perhaps what the Left means by “swiftboating” is “making TRUE accusations about a candidate” and how dare anyone do that to Obama. Then there is no contradiction in Hundt’s column—just a bunch of truth he doesn’t want to hear and doesn’t want anyone else to hear either.
3:07 pm
Well said. I really like Ed Morrissey’s point-”judgment”. Even before these events in BHO’s past came to the forefront
I wondered – what evidence of his good judgment was he asking us to rely on? The only event he has presented is his opposition to the Iraq war. A very thin reed when you consider he 1. Did not have access to the intelligence reports,(and thus his position was what is best for BHO) 2. He had no position of authority and more importantly responsibility for getting it right as there would be no consequence to him or others if he got it wrong. It would be vastly different in the White House.
This man is going to have to come up with something else
3:08 pm
Reed Hundt said “...or declined to disavow a Korean War vet and pastor because he spoke too harshly one Sunday…”
Wright was born September 22, 1941. The Korean War was founght 1950-53. That’s one young soldier.
3:51 pm
In one breath left wingers say “we deserved to be attacked on 9/11”. In the next breath they “9/11 was an inside job”. In one breath left wingers say “Obama should not be held accountable for Rev. Wright’s remarks”. In the next breath they say “Rev. Wright speaks the truth”.
Left wingers are like an Orwellian dog chasing it’s own tail. Obama’s supporters are his third biggest enemy, after his pastor and his wife. Like the 1980 presidential election, the polls will not reflect the landslide that will take place on election day. There has never been a presidential candidate whose personal associations have inspired this level of visceral repulsion. But it’s not something that ordinary people are going to feel comfortable talking about to pollsters. They’ll just go into that voting booth, pull the curtain and give this guy the finger.
3:54 pm
I actually think Obama is being Swiftboated … he is being destroyed by his own actions and words … the “swiftboating” is pointing out the truth …
It was a nice con job while it lasted, I’m sure alot of “consultants” for Obama have gotten quite rich this year … they’ll need the money because when this con job unravels they’ll be out of work for a long time in DC …
3:58 pm
Why Doesn’t Obama Renounce His Bigoted Church?
Politicians want to progress from office to higher office. Barack Obama based his Illinois political career on the black power politics of Chicago, and holds his US Senate seat because of this, and some luck in facing a senate election opponent who imploded. It seems that Pastor Wright was crucial for 20 years to Obama’s connections and success.
Obama’s message is: Some of Wright’s statements are wrong, but Wright is basically a good guy with love in his heart. My words matter, and they are different from Wright’s words.
Running for president is a wonderful opportunity and a gamble. If Obama does not win the presidency, he surely wants to keep his job as US senator. He can’t burn the bridge that keeps him in national politics. Obama does not renounce Wright, because Wright’s speeches reflect the beliefs of a large fraction of Obama’s support for his senate seat. Obama’s direct words were “I can no more disown him [Wright] than I can disown the black community”.
This makes Obama a politician who has gained political power by satisfying his base. He is not a courageous statesman who gained authority by teaching a better way or by reconciling different views. Actually, Obama is supporting a church that accepts and teaches the old, divisive way.
Obama plays the old political game of saying different things to different groups. The message along the way is: I’m saying things to my political base only to keep their support. Ignore that, because I’m telling the truth to you.
Personally, I reject politicians who look for support by accepting and supporting racism, regardless of its value as a political tactic.
4:17 pm
“disavow a Korean War vet” Timothy McVeigh was a vet, I’m a vet, so what?.
These same people who called me names when I wore the uniform never pass up the chance to point out their own military vets as somehow wrapped in a shield that protects them from criticism (does the name Kerry come to mind?)
Retired E9
4:29 pm
Swiftboating = Inconvenient Truth
Christmas in Cambodia
God Damn AmeriKKKa
4:36 pm
As #8 points out, One wonders how Jeremiah Wright’s entry into the US Marines in 1961 (per Wiki) qualifies him as a “Korean War Vet”. Is this just another lie from the left?
If nothing else, Obama’s poor choice of associations should disqualify him for our nation’s highest office.
4:36 pm
in the Age of Terror… our President being on a first name basis with an unrepentant terrorist is probably a bad example to set and causes most Americans with half a brain to wonder “What is that guy doing with William Ayers?”
Precisely why every Republican should hope this unelectable man is the nominee.
My worry is that Hillary can still beat him, and that in the course of the battle with Obama she’ll have accumulated an ever more moderate and centrist appearance than she’s ever had in her career.
4:37 pm
ooops, I meant AllenS in #7, not #8 sorry to all
5:24 pm
“Swiftboating” to me is a positive. I donated a fair amount to the Swifties and it’s true, virtually none of what they stated and wrote has ever been refuted by Kerry.
I also agree with The Fop and others above. Obama’s associations render him repugnant and radioactive.
Today, a woman caller (Peggy from PA, I think), very intelligently laid out the situation Obama is in to Hannity and asked (I’m paraphrasing for brevity): “How can this man who is friends with domestic terrorists put his hand on the Bible and swear to defend the Constitution and U.S. against all enemies, foreign and domestic?” Sean was totally stumped and speechless. I was applauding in the car, because I’ve asked myself that many times already.
Does Obama take any of this Constitution and U.S. stuff seriously? Does he know what enemies are? Is he a Marxist plant that half the country is in danger of falling for? Do the Dems not vet anyone anymore? I am simply stunned that this dangerous charlatan has gotten as far as he has. Land of opportunity indeed.
5:34 pm
It’s nice to see that Karl Rove and his tactics are alive and well in the conservative blogsphere. That is, if you say something often enough and loud enough, what you say becomes the truth. A prerequisite for this tactic is that you take something that is irrefutable and expand on it from there.
So here we have Obama who has an affiliation of varying degrees with at least three of the Gang of Four promoted by conservatives: Wright, Rezko, and Ayers (outside of conservative blogs I’ve not read anything credible about Auchi). He obviously knows Wright, has heard him speak, and has done a poor job of explaining his connection to him. But do you honestly, I mean in your heart of hearts, think that Obama is a racist who hates America? If you believe that then I suggest you keep taking whatever you’re taking because once you come down you’re going to really hate reality.
Obama’s connection with Rezko is less problematic but still needs explaining. Everything anybody is accusing him of should be found out the same way Nixon was found out: Follow the money. If he did anything it will show up somewhere. Does the real estate deal qualify? Probably not. The owner got what he wanted for the property (if I remember right). Did Rezko’s wife qualify to buy the land? Probably not, but I work for a family that’s involved in real estate and there are all sorts of legitimate reasons to have Rezko’s wife buy the property. Making the Rezko property unbuildable looks like a sweetheart deal, but it also looks like a homeowner looking to protect a piece a property he owns and enhancing it. In the grand scheme of things, it probably falls somewhere short of a politician investing some money, say, in a baseball team and reaping huge profits a few years later when the team is sold (sound like someone we know?).
As for Ayers, I think this one is being made up out of whole cloth. He’s a neighbor. He sits on a board with him (and 20 other people). He was involved in organizational meetings for his candidacy. He is not a close confidant. He doesn’t advise the campaign. He doesn’t appear for him. I’m not even sure he should “disavow” him because there doesn’t seem to be anything to disavow. But if you say often enough that they are friends, it begins to sound like Obama listens to him, trusts him, and wants him in the cabinet. Total rubbish.
Let me just leave you with one more thought. I’m pretty damn tired of reading on this and other conservative blogs that liberals hate America. Oh, I know it’s a softball kind of comment—easy to make a hit with. But I really can’t believe that The Fop is convinced that a vast majority liberals think we deserved 9/11 or that Wright speaks the truth. It’s utter nonsense. There are extremes of both sides that take positions that are unpalatable, but the majority does not. If you really believe that, then I recommend again that you continue taking whatever it is that is causing this altered state of consciousness and not come back to reality.
5:40 pm
‘Swiftboating’ means ‘telling the undisputed truth about some one.’
The left tries to pretend it means that some one is telling an untruth but the fact is Kerry never disproved any of the Swift Vet stories. He lcaimed he did but there is no record of it happening anywhere. The Vets wanted to meet with Kerry and debate it but he refused and he continues to refuse to sign his 180 to release his records. Bush released his but not Kerry. Oh he released pieces of his record but he did not release it all like Bush did. And that is because the Swift Boat Vets always were telling the truth. Why do you think the left shuns Kerry today? He never dealt with the swift vets.
5:52 pm
[...] Nuthouse: The Total Witlessness of Obama Apologists Say Uncle: Obama’s Flip Flop on Guns The American Mind: McCain: Hamas Worst Nightmare [...]
6:03 pm
Ayers-
Well the only reason he’s “acceptable” in Chi-town is because he is sitting on his father Thomas Ayer’s vast sums of mmmmmooooonnnneeey.
Thomas Ayer’s was CEO of ComEdison also on the board of the University of Illinois-where he donated generously and built a large portion of the campus.
The same University of Illinois that can’t quite remember how sonny boy Billy Ayers got his professorship there.
Oh and you give to much credit to Daley-he admire’s his daddy’s money-as does Obama.
Why else would Obama have his mentor Alice Palmer introduce him to the movers of Cook County at the Ayer’s household?
Why would you risk officially coming out at the advent of your career at Ayer’s…?
Because Ayer’s is filthy stinking rich.
Now at the very least can’t we all agree that Obama is not pragmatic?
Somewhere someone should make a T-Shirt for Obama saying-
I did my Debut at Ayer’s Mansion and All I Got was A lousy 200 Bucks
It’s probably more than that-and it was done smartly -except even The Sun Times is telling everyone to go away…so who’s going to find just how much of Daddy Ayer’s money went Obama’s way?
Well not the newspaper men of Chicago-and why is that?
Well money talks and sometimes money gets people to shut up…
Ayers would be no where, would not be a charitable pillar of society if he didn’t have his Daddy’s money.
But now he’s bought himself a second act and respectability all with the bare liftng of his fingers to sign the bloody checks.
And Obama might just find out that money has blood on it and if Ayer’s had his way it would be defaced with the blood of soldiers from Fort Dix.
These rich spoilt gits-the Weathermen- blew themselves up in some fancy hoighty toity Georgetown townhouse that belonged to one of the rich brat’s father-so they could blow up the poor kids that couldn’t shirk their Vietnam duties like them-weren’t rich enough.
But ya they are all about the little guy-the Democratic party and they are all for hanging out with the guy that would blow the little guy up and when you ask or inquire to say that you are bothered by it you are told to stick it, who cares you IDIOT that happened when I was eight.
Good Answer Snobo!
But ya the Democratic party would rather lose with this guy and blame it on racism then admit that they are jerks, that they are against what most of America stands for and that they don’t want to preserve America as we know it.
That is why they are so desperate to get you to shut up about Ayers because that is how America will insinctively know, it is something a majority will get a wiff of the very stench of that.
You don’t get to be President of America when you are against most of it, when all you focus on is what’s wrong with it.
Go be President of a place that Ayers would think is worthy-start in Cuba..
6:03 pm
How can Obama be “Swiftboated” when he’s never been in the military?
6:17 pm
Great piece. Will be forwarding it around.
6:29 pm
This is all interesting up to a point, but I it would be nice to hear an actual critique of Obama, rather than damnation by association. Again, our current president and his family have deep ties with the House of Saud, the biggest terrorists on the planet. Yet somehow people manage to hurl legitimate criticism at Bush without bringing that up. Likewise, there is plenty that Obama has done that makes him vulnerable and open to question as a presidential candidate.
Yet few in the blogsphere have expressed a line of reasoning that would actually make an undecided want to vote for him or not. Just personal attacks mostly based on the company he keeps or once kept. Its the same with Clinton or McCain. No reasoned critiques. Just anger and outrage on all sides. Frankly, I’m having a hard time buying any of it.
6:31 pm
I want to know when Obama will finally be forced to repudiate his other unacceptable relationship—and I’m not just talking about Rev. Wright, either.
http://tinyurl.com/5dgeww
It’s high time someone holds the man’s feet to the fire for these irresponsible and unforgivable associations!
7:13 pm
Many of us have criticized Bush’ family ties to Saudi Arabia, but that’s not the point. None of this is guilt by association, so much as being an accessory to the crime. Obama was directly involved with Rezko, taking donations from him despite being aware of indictments pending against Rez. Obama worked directly with Ayers on a very radical foundation that approved grants for an organization founded by a former PLO associate-Rshid Khalidi. Obama’s approval as a board member indicates his belief in the work of an organization that whilst resettling Palestinians, concurrently calls for the destruction of the state of Israel, an ally of the US and the only democracy in the Middle East. This was 2001, between years in the legislature, and pre Senate, and part of the experience he claims as a community organizer. Ayers was on the same board. Obama calls these actions as he “goofed.” If even Obama admits mistaken judgment, why can’t the left wing press? As for the record, it’s precisely the problem mentioned” obama does not have one to speak of! Even here in Illinois he was MIA on crucial votes.
7:20 pm
Obama and friends would have all believe that he is now losing to Clinton because voters are RACIST! But the real reason is PATRIOTISM. We see Obama as being unpatriotic due to the company he keeps. Their beliefs are his beliefs, and we will NOT vote for a racist, radical black separatist. We Dems will vote for McCain in November if Clinton is not the nominee. Pelosi, Dean and Reid don’t believe this, however. I can hardly wait to see the looks on their incredibly foolish faces
7:48 pm
Remind me never to get on his bad side…
Rick Moran has one of the most devastating takedowns of a typical Barack Obama apologist I’ve seen yet.
We’ve all come across them – whether they be in the blogosphere or on the pages of the NYT, or just standing there by the water cooler. ...
7:50 pm
McCarthyism LIVES
7:57 pm
Obama’s problem associations with Wright, Rezko, and Ayers ..
are trivial.
8:19 pm
Returning to presidential politics,[Colin] Powell condemned controversial remarks by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s pastor of 20 years, as “deplorable” but complimented the Democratic candidate for his speech on race that followed in the aftermath.
“Rev. Wright is also somebody who has made enormous contributions in his community and has turned a lot of lives around,” Powell said, “And so, I have to put that in context with these very offensive comments that he made, which I reject out of hand.”
http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Vote2008/Story?id=4622268&page=4
8:21 pm
You missed one at the Daily Kos. Not so much apologist for Obama’s buddies but a contortionist’s explanation of Obama’s loss in PA.
———————
Obama’s surrogate, the Daily Kos, whose recent article was demeaning to the hard working blue-collar folks of Appalachia as well as African Americans with its article “But why didn’t he win?”- http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/4/23/12477/3996—-
Analysis: If you don’t vote for Obama you are dumb, uneducated, and definitely not part of the “large creative classes”. Yes, Appalachia—Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Kentucky – you are stupid, according to the Daily Kos.
And what’s with that “overwhelmingly white” comment? Does that mean diversity (i.e. inclusion of blacks, Hispanics, and other races breeds stupidity and an unreasoned, non-creative instinct to vote for Hillary and not Obama?” In other words; only the “overwhelmingly white” “creative classes” are smart enough to be given the right to vote.
And what about that “and of course she does terrible with African Americans”. Couple that with the “overwhelmingly white” comment and you get: The “overwhelmingly white” “creative classes” are what is really putting Obama in the White House based on an analysis of his policies, while the African American voters are merely voting instinctually, like moths to a flame, and their lemming-like flocking to Obama purely because of his race is a nice bonus for the liberal agenda.
Seems like the Progressive liberals (oops, an Oxymoron) want us to progress all the way back to 16th century segregated Aristocracies.
8:25 pm
I was one of those college student “radicals” during the Vietnam war, but somehow did mange to get an advanced degree in engineering and a law degree, both of which support my current profession. Maybe back then I shouted off the pig, but never blew anything up although the thought crossed my mind on more than one occasion. Now my incendiary fantasies only arise when forced to use a computer running Windows.
As a voter I study the politics and positions of all candidates and especially devote my time to absorbing both national nominating conventions. I make up my mind of who to vote for president after careful internal debate and consideration. I belong to neither party.
I was impressed by Obama’s address in 2004. I admit that I was initially pleased when he became the front runner n this primary season over Hillary. Yet, the more he is exposed, the more I see he is nothing more than an scripted media image.
10:27 pm
Yes, some may think trying to blow up the Pentagon is “wrong”
And some wouldn’t. Perhaps even this person:
“We of the Kennedy and Johnson administrations who participated in the decisions on Vietnam acted according to what we thought were the principles and traditions of this nation. We made our decisions in light of those values. Yet we were wrong, terribly wrong. We owe it to future generations to explain why.”
Robert S.McNamara,
IN RETROSPECT:THE TRAGEDY AND LESSONS OF VIETNAM
by ROBERT S. MCNAMARA WITH BRIAN VANDEMARK
11:18 pm
I didn’t realize how apropo my effort at telling a joke was until I read this article. I didn’t know that FOO meant Friends of Obama.
The story: When a man moved to Canada, people kept telling him that in Canada, they have a “FOO” bird. The rumor was that if a “FOO” bird sh*t on, you, if you brushed it off, you would die.
The man was very careful about letting any “FOO” birds get near him.
But, one day, he was busy, lost in thought, as he was walking along the boulevard, and sure enough, a “FOO” bird did sh*t on him. He brushed it off, without thinking, and he dropped dead on the spot.
The moral of the story:
“If the FOO sh*ts, wear it.” Anon. gw.
11:49 pm
This is grasping at straws here…nothing has been proven that Obama actually did anything to help Rezko or some group Ayers was associated with. Is this Idiocy on Obama’s part to associate with fools? Damn straight! Is it a crime? Nothing has been proven or even alleged by the appropriate authorities, so at this point its hard to say ” yes. There is much to actually criticize Obama on, but all this anger about what may well end up as molehills is beginning to sound a whole lot like Whitewater and Vincent Fostor circa 1992.
Face it, does anybody in here actually support or even like John McCain? Of course not. Because if he was partially admired here, there would be no need to tear down Obama to convince yourselves to vote for him! Listen, all 3 candidates are quite flawed, but as far as I am concerned, only Hillary is totally unacceptable. Therefore, it is a choice between McCain and Obama. Listing character flaws, naming questionable associations, and angry rants about who hates the USA more more won’t help this country make up its mind. It just serves to embitter us. Left and Right need to chill, seriously…
7:23 am
The reason Obama can be seen with the likes of Ayers and Wright is simply that he thinks like they do.
Obama has literally spent his life surrounded by radicals. His mother was a campus radical; his mentor of his childhood years was a well-known radical writer; his college friends were black radicals; his first employer was a radical Christian group touting liberation theology and Alinsky mixed with the New Testament; his mentor from those years was a radical; his first associations in urban Chicago politics were radicals. His supporters are radicals, his churchmates are radicals, his pastor is a radical. Radical theory does not sound outlandish to him; it’s what he’s heard all his life.
It does not matter all that much how close Obama is to Ayers and Dohrn. The message is not that Obama has odd friends and bad judgment (although that’s certainly a problem for him in electoral politics). The message is that Obama is, himself, a theoretical Marxist, and represents the ascendancy of world socialism to the presidency of the US.
You can read some of the supporting material from my blog site.
The research about Barack Obama has paid off. He’s no longer a mystery. We know where he stands. America would be insane to elect this man president.
8:04 am
[...] Yikes — This guy, who wrote this blindly partisan, MoveOn mentality riff ripping John McCain for supposedly “tolerat(ing) attacks” that are “Swifboating” Barack Obama (uh-huh — ask the NC GOP) used to be in charge of the Federal Communications Commission. This is a (mostly) free country, Mr. Hundt, and are we ever lucky Mr. Hundt didn’t do more damage while he was there. John McCain is not a dictator. When will you ask the candidate I irreverently refer to as “Mr. BOOHOO-OUCH” (Barack O-bomba Overseas Hussein “Obambi” Obama – Objectively Unfit Coddler of Haters) to stop the attacks on McCain by Howard Dean? (HT Rightwing Nuthouse) [...]
10:12 am
On April 24, 2006, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) first promised to implement “a commonsense plan” to address skyrocketing gas prices.
But what is the reality? Yesterday I paid $3.60 a gallon. Nearly double what it was when big tuna promised “elect dims and we’ll bring a change to gas prices.” I cant afford anymore of dims’ changes.
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/April06/Rubberstamp.html
11:44 pm
Larry your brother nails it, but needs to look a bit further back in history about volume and frequency. He really means Goebbels. How many degrees of separation from Rove is for Larry to answer.
Rick, you really hope to gain traction with your essay only underscores your complete lack of faith with John McCain. You can’t get behind McCain yet you can attack Obama.
In your own blog, largely preaching to the choir, as if anyone might take what you have written and submit it to someone on the fence who might be influenced, I offer up that 80+% believe the country to be on the wrong track. re-inforce among the cognoscenti or convince the drive by bloggers like myself that McCain is someone to vote for without closed nostrils.
It’s far too easy to go after Obama when so many others have lobbed up soft targets.
Tell us why McCain was right to oppose the latest GI bill. Support the troops!
Here’s what we can do. We can vet McCain before they do. Bring it on, give us your best shot. Let’s get it over with.
No wonder you hold your nose…
You expect my brother to compare me to Goebbels? Nice try.
As for McCain, I have said on countless occassion that he has the same problem that Obama has – he sets himself up as some kind of bastion of morality when in fact, his past as well as present associations give the lie to that notion.
The reason I write about Obama so much is that McCain is off in the wings awaiting a resolution to the Democratic nomination fight. Obama’s hypocrisy and extraordinarily bad judgement is news right now. Keep watching and you’ll get all the McCain bashing you can handle - trust me.
btw – don’t tell me what to write about. Write it on your own blog if you have one but don’t presume to dictate to me what I should write.
ed.
11:46 pm
Let me see if I can explain it.
McCain = flawed American vessel.
Obama = empty Marxist vessel.
9:07 am
Towering fly ball to left center… it’s got a chance… Hundt is racing to the wall, but he’s not going to get it… that ball is gone, 460 feet over the center-field wall
Moran hits his 12th homer of the year, and we’re only in April, folks
2:51 pm
Rick, you MUST click over to Malkin’s site and read Wright’s speech to NAACP in Detroit. I am dumbfounded… speechless… amazed…
Two points: 1) if I (white male) made ANY of the same statements, I would be labeled a ranting racist. 2) perhaps it is because I am white, but it amazes me how important it is to some blacks (note the resounding applause in the background) to justify the differences between whites and blacks, especially with regards to education and intellect.
I have never really noticed the differences. My valedictorian in high school was black. I disliked him, but not because he was black, but because I finished a distant 3rd. He was smart, but I new plenty of black guys in high school that couldn’t spell “cat”. I didn’t really notice them because of all the white guys that couldn’t spell “dog”.
Anyway, check it out and let me know your thoughts.
2:52 pm
And apparently, I can’t spell “knew”.
8:20 am
[...] for the most outstanding posts of the preceding week. The winner in the Council post category was Right Wing Nut House’s post, “The Total Witlessness of Obama Apologists”. In this post Rick Moran examines the zeal [...]
12:01 pm
[...] the council side, a much deserved first place went to Right Wing Nuthouse for The Total Witlessness of Obama Apologists, in which Rick Moran issued a scathing denunciation of those who twist themselves into pretzel-like [...]
4:33 pm
Love your blog. When critizing someone’s JUDGMENT… please note the correct spelling.
Must’ve skipped right over the spellchecker.
ed.