The Campaign is over. Now we watch.
This week, Obama reached out to Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Once again simply brilliant, the way this man applies the lessons of past presidents.
It is better to have people inside the tent, pissing out than outside the tent, pissing in, Dwight Eisenhower used to say. Abraham Lincoln became famous hiring his former enemies into his administration.
Obama once again proves his chessmanship and icecold opportunism.
By bringing up Hillary Clinton for the Sec State position, he serves a variety of objectives. No matter what, he wins. He wins by simply opening up the discussion, as he comes across as uniter. He wins, should she accept the position, as he checkmates her for 2012, should he not be successful in his first term. Being part of his adminisstration, there is not a chance in hell that she in such a case could materialize as a democratic alternative. He further mutes any potential opposition, if she in fact becomes a member of his team. And a strong opposition this would be, if one considers Bill and Hillary still having a strong following within the democratic party.
If Hillary does not accept the "Olive Branch", it is she who comes across potentially as divisive. he thus puts his potentially strongest opposition faction within the own party from the get go in the defensive. he buys time at least, should she at least accept for a period of his first term, then bow out early enough to sell herself as alternative for 2016.
No matter what happens, he wins. A genious chess move.
By reaching out to McCain, Obama without publicly acknowledging the fact how centrist and independent McCain is, brings a strong voice to the table who in fact has lost ( never had really) a ton of support within his own party. He comes across as bi-partisan without having to really reach out to the real power centres within the republican party. Once again here, no matter what happens, Obama wins points without having to concede anything. Brilliant.
We admire the man. He does not do anything spectacular here, but his ability to see and seize political opportunities to further his agenda is truly staggering. Is is one thing to have many options. It is another to make use of them. He does read and it shows. Having studied the mistakes of earlier presidents, he is able to not make any such off the hip decisions.
We haven't seen this level of political macchiavellism since Nixon. As much, as we do not like to admit that the American President must be a Macchiavelli, in order to further an American Agenda, we must nevertheless appreciate that these times do require a politician with an uncanny instinct. An opportunist who is able to seize the moment and most of all a president who does not make dumb mistakes. There will be many tough decision making moments in the near future, where Obama can not do it right for all interested parties. Moments in time . where his popularity will suffer (naturally) and enemies will materialize. As Biden said - these will be the moments of truth, where the real metal of the backbone will be tested.
So far however, Obama achieved the most important immediate objective. He did not make any dumb mistake, but is eagerly working diligently on preparing the battle field. If he indeed manages to combine this tactical ability with a strategic vision and corresponding follow-through, proving like Abe Lincoln strenght and principle during times of crisis, watch out, Putin, as you may get a player to the table whom many underestimated.
So far, Obama has done everything right. he wins with the Hillary Clinton and McCain discussion. He wins by letting Gates stay on (at least for a while). He lets Bush get us almost to a win in Iraq and a potential withdrawal almost within the time frame of his own promises, so Obama will be credited with 'ending the war".
As said before - Obama can win quick points on the foreign policy dimension. The fact that there are many opportunities, is for this discussion somewhat irrelevant. What's relevant is that any president must take advantage of these opportunities.
So far, Obama has shown to be able to recognize openings and seize the moment.
That's promising. We hate to admit it, but America needs a shrewd politician. We believe that for now Obama has proven to be exactly that and deserves to be given an honest chance to demonstrate more of it for the sake of this country.
Is he more than just a shrewd politician? Does he have the moral strength, courage and principles enabling him to make tough decisions? That will have to be seen and soon. We once again state that we hope that we were wrong and the gut feeling of the majority of the American People was right.
The Presidency has many facettes. The job description and requirements are complex.
In order to enter history as a successful president, Obama will have to pass many tests on many dimensions and topics. Charisma, eloquence, strong tactical ability and opportunism only takes you that far. But these are needed qualities - no doubt.
So, Obama has definitely passed the first tests on aforementioned dimensions. I personally am at a point to concede that he has proven so far, that he has the ability to learn from history and most of all does not make any stupid mistakes. That is reason for at least some optimism. The time however for decisions on a strategic, longterm dimension with potentially grave impact on the US will come soon. (Energy and Taxing of Businesses) Will Obama be an ideologue, trying to shape the entire society a la FDR into his vision of a social capitalism or will Obama be able to appreciate the positive factors of capitalism and free trade as promoted by the conservative side and become a truly fact based, pragmatic leader governing from a center left perspective and leading us thus out of a depression?
Time will tell. And soon at that.
_________________
Legislative Accomplishments?? Zero_____________________
A Commentary By Tony Blankley
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
The essence of this election season couldn't be simpler. The American public is so appalled at the condition of the country (which it unfairly, but not implausibly blames on the despised President Bush) that with fate casting John McCain in the role of Bush's surrogate, a majority actually is considering voting for Sen. Obama.
>>>>>>Read entire Article
WASHINGTON -- Convicted felon Tony Rezko. Unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers. And the race-baiting Rev. Jeremiah Wright. It is hard to think of any presidential candidate before Barack Obama sporting associations with three more execrable characters. Yet let the McCain campaign raise the issue, and the mainstream media begin fulminating about dirty campaigning tinged with racism and McCarthyite guilt by association.
But associations are important. They provide a significant insight into character. They are particularly relevant in relation to a potential president as new, unknown, opaque and self-contained as Obama.
With the economy overshadowing everything, it may be too late politically to be raising this issue. But that does not make it, as conventional wisdom holds, in any way illegitimate
.>>>>>>>read entire article
Here just the major ones:
· 154 Obama lied about being asked to wear dead soldier's bracelet: family had asked Obama to stop wearing it
· 151 Obama lied about Kissinger's views of diplomacy during first debate; Kissinger confirms the lie
· 145 Obama accuses McCain of lying about Biden being against clean coal; video proves Obama is lying
· 132 Obama grossly misquoted Sen.Clinton about her vote on a banking bill; BHO used the false quote to show why voters don't trust Government
· 124 Obama lies about his interference in Iraqi negotiations; but his campaign admits his treachery
· 85 Claims reducing obesity to 80's levels would save Medicaid ONE TRILLION DOLLARS; not even close
· 73: Obama promised to filibust FISA; later Obama voted for FISA and now denies changing his position
· 42 Claims he never said he was a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare; Video proves he did
Obama WTF defines "DOCUMENTED LIE " as :
1) a statement by one or more reliable news agencies or credible authorities citing supporting verifiable facts which rebut a reported statement by Obama.
a) Obama is seen to be holding multiple positions depending on the audience, eg The Jerusalem flip flop...where his position was altered with 18 hours, talking to different audiences.or
Annenberg Factcheck.org; at U Penn
At the St Petersberg Times; http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/
Washington Post Fact Checker ...Michael Dobbs
Top of the Ticket Blog at the LA Times;
Political Punch at ABC News.com.
Dozens of other major news orgs are quoted to provide support for one or more lies
Barack Obama
Here's looking at you, kid
Sep 18th 2008
From The Economist print edition
IF YOU find yourself believing that “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for”, or that “this is the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow” or even, tout court, that “yes we can”, the chances are that you are suffering from a severe case of Obamamania.
Tens of millions of Americans and an even larger number of Europeans have fallen victim to the syndrome, which involves a belief that a young black senator from Chicago can cure the world’s ills, in part because of his race, in part because of his obvious intelligence and rhetorical skill; but in no part because of any record of achievement in the past. Fortunately, an inexpensive remedy is at hand.
It comes in the form of a new book by David Freddoso, “The Case Against Barack Obama”. Unlike the authors of some of the cruder attacks on Mr Obama, Mr Freddoso works for a well-respected organisation, the online version of the National Review. Although it is a conservative publication and the author makes no secret of where his political sympathies lie, this is a well-researched, extensively footnoted work. It aims not so much to attack Mr Obama as to puncture the belief that he is in some way an extraordinary, mould-breaking politician.
The Obama that emerges from its pages is not, Mr Freddoso says, “a bad person. It’s just that he’s like all the rest of them. Not a reformer. Not a Messiah. Just like all the rest of them in Washington.” And the author makes a fairly compelling case that this is so. The best part of the book concentrates on Mr Obama’s record in Chicago, his home town and the place from which he was elected to the Illinois state Senate in 1996, before moving to the United States Senate in 2004.
The book lays out in detail how this period began in a way that should shock some of Mr Obama’s supporters: he won the Democratic nomination for his Illinois seat by getting a team of lawyers to throw all the other candidates off the ballot on various technicalities. One of those he threw off was a veteran black politician, a woman who helped him get started in politics in the first place.
If Mr Obama really were the miracle-working, aisle-jumping, consensus-seeking new breed of politician his spin-doctors make him out to be, you would expect to see the evidence in these eight years. But there isn’t very much. Instead, as Mr Freddoso rather depressingly finds, Mr Obama spent the whole period without any visible sign of rocking the Democratic boat.
He was a staunch backer of Richard Daley, who as mayor failed to stem the corruption that has made Chicago one of America’s most notorious cities. Nor did he lift a finger against John Stroger and his son Todd, who succeeded his father as president of Cook County’s Board of Commissioners shortly before Stroger senior died last January. Cook County, where Chicago is located, has been extensively criticised for corrupt practices by a federally appointed judge, Julia Nowicki.
The full extent of Mr Obama’s close links with two toxic Chicago associates, a radical black preacher, Jeremiah Wright, and a crooked property developer, Antoin Rezko, is also laid out in detail. The Chicago section is probably the best part of the book, though the story continues: once he got to Washington, DC, Mr Obama’s record of voting with his party became one of the most solid in the capital. Mr Freddoso notes that he did little or nothing to help with some of the great bipartisan efforts of recent years, notably on immigration reform or in a complex battle over judicial nominations.
On the whole, though, Mr Freddoso raises legitimate points. And he ends with a question Obamamaniacs should ask themselves more often:
“Do you hope that Barack Obama will change politics if he becomes president? On what grounds?”
_____________________
Boston Globe
go back over 15 years
CHICAGO - Real estate developer and fast-food magnate Antoin "Tony" Rezko spent years pouring thousands of dollars in campaign contributions into Barack Obama's climb from the Illinois legislature to Capitol Hill and helped him raise tens of thousands more. Obama has also been forced to explain how Rezko got tangled in the purchase of the Obama family home and other ties to Rezko, some of them going back more than 15 years. If federal prosecutors are right, his ties to Rezko may mean Obama's campaign unwittingly accepted money generated by illegal activities.
"The senator exhibited some bad judgment in continuing the relationship once it became clear that Tony Rezko had such serious clouds overhead," said Cindi Canary, director of the nonpartisan Illinois Campaign for Political Reform.
>>>>> read entire article
___________________
Obama ranked 1. Biden ranked 3 on liberal voting.
>>>>> see charts
Grim proving ground for Obama's housing policy
It seems that Obama recognizes that while his résumé titles are impressive, his actual accomplishments are weak. It's as if he were jockeying >>>>>> read entire article
One problem, they’re wrong.
The text of the bill states:
“Each class or course in comprehensive sex education in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV.”
They repeated the Obama campaign’s explanation that the bill was about ‘inappropriate touching’.
Byron York of National Review researched this bill and provides and an explantion along with the text of the bill in his article On Sex-Ed Ad, McCain is Right.
However, when this article was brought up during last night’s CNN broadcast it was dismissed.
by Charles Krauthammer
>>>>>>Clinton's withholding the "I've come to know this man" was vindictive and supremely self-serving -- but jarring, too, because you realize that if she didn't do it, no one else would. Not because of any inherent deficiency in Obama's character. But simply as a reflection of a young life with a biography remarkably thin by the standard of presidential candidates.
Who was there to speak about the real Barack Obama? His wife. She could tell you about Barack the father, the husband, the family man in a winning and perfectly sincere way. But that only takes you so far. It doesn't take you to the public man, the national leader.>>>>>
_______________________
June 21, 2008, Factcheck.org
His first ad of the post-primary season puffs up his legislative accomplishments.
Summary
Obama has released his first post-primary ad, a 60-second spot that's airing in 18 battleground states. It paints a picture of Obama's accomplishments that could leave viewers with a misimpression or two.When Obama discusses his legislative accomplishments, he leaves out some important context.The ad talks about laws that Obama "passed," but in fact, he sponsored only one of the three bills mentioned and cosponsored another. The third included provisions from some bills he'd sponsored earlier, but his name wasn't attached to the one that passed. And two of the three laws were accomplishments of the Illinois Legislature, not the U.S. Senate.
So for Obama to say that he "passed a law" casts him as a legislative Lone Ranger, hogging credit that properly belongs to other parties as well.
The incredible Image and Branding Campaign of the Obama Team is truly amazing. A huge populus is hyped about " Change, Hope" and his obvious charisma, willing to give an unknown quantity a shot at the single most important post in the world.
Many do not look at his specifics, his track record which is one of the most leftist of all senators. We think it is time that the American People start to scrutinize this man who has delivered nothing than slogans and fluff - certainly no substance.
Why is it that the normal average Joe Blow must undergoe a serious Job Interview for pretty much any type of work, whereas Obama seems to skate by without any serioous questions raised as to background, track record and experience?
In this thread I will try to commence the process of scrutinizing Senator Obama, as a president must have more than just a great image.
________________________________
Factcheck.org
Obama's Lame Claim About McCain's Money
June 20, 2008
Obama says McCain is "fueled" by money from lobbyists and PACs, but those sources account for less than 1.7 percent of McCain's money.
Summary
Obama announced he would become the first presidential candidate since 1972 to rely totally on private donations for his general election campaign, opting out of the system of public financing and spending limits that was put in place after the Watergate scandal.One reason, he said, is that "John McCain’s campaign and the Republican National Committee are fueled by contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs."We find that to be a large exaggeration and a lame excuse. In fact, donations from PACs and lobbyists make up less than 1.7 percent of McCain's total receipts, and they account for only about 1.1 percent of the RNC's receipts.
_____________________________
Obama Flips and Flops
by Charles Krauthammer
>>>>>> Obama's seasonally adjusted principles are beginning to pile up: NAFTA, campaign finance reform, warrantless wiretaps, flag pins, gun control. What's left? Iraq. The reversal is coming, and soon. >>>>>>
________________________
Factcheck.org:
Obama's Inflated Health "Savings"
June 16, 2008
He claims that a shift to electronic medical records will help save families up to $2,500 a year in his first term. Independent experts say that's wishful thinking.
Summary
Obama says his health care plan will garner large savings – $120 billion a year, or $2,500 per family – with more than half coming from the use of electronic health records. And he says he’ll make that happen in his first term. We find his statements to be overly optimistic, misleading and, to some extent, contradicted by one of his own advisers. And it masks the true cost of his plan to cover millions of Americans who now have no health insurance.
________________________________
New York Times
Big-dollar donors are a major force for Obama
By Michael Luo and Christopher Drew
updated 9:19 p.m. PT, Tues., Aug. 5, 2008
WASHINGTON - In an effort to cast himself as independent of the influence of money on politics, Senator Barack Obama often highlights the campaign contributions of $200 or less >>>>read on here
______________________________________________
Pork Barrel Spending?Special Interests?
____________________________________________________
___________________________________
Obama’s Lobbyist Connection
(Newsweek)
>>>>Last week, Obama hit John McCain for hiring "some of the biggest lobbyists in Washington" to run his campaign; Obama's aides say their candidate, as a foe of "special interests," has refused to take money from lobbyists or employ them. Neither Axelrod nor his partners at ASK ever registered as lobbyists for Commonwealth Edison—and under Illinois's loose disclosure laws, they were not required to>>>>>Read the entire Piece
_____________________________
FactCheck.Org:
Obama's Work Claim
July 2, 2008
His new ad says he "worked his way" through college and law school. His campaign says he had a few summer jobs and once sold newspaper subscriptions while in college.
Summary
Obama’s latest ad repeats an often-stated claim, saying he "worked his way through college and Harvard Law.” We know Obama took out loans to get himself through school. But the campaign at first provided information on just two jobs Obama had in those years, and they were both in the summer.The ad also says he "passed a law to move people from welfare to work, slashed the rolls by 80 percent." Actually, the Illinois law was a required follow-up to the 1996 federal welfare reform law worked out by President Clinton and the Republican Congress. Welfare rolls did go down by nearly as much as the ad says, but Obama can't claim sole credit.
______________________________
The Truth vs. Barack Obama
Found On gossiprocks.com
An unemotional pragmatic compilation of Obama Statements which are blatantly false or misleading with solid evidence presented. Overall the list paints a disturbing picture of the freshman senator from Illinois.
________________________________
The "Distractions" Of Obama's Character
By Charles Krauthammer
>>>>>>>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.) >>>>>>
_______________________________
Great Articles found online by Wolf Howling:
The Race Card, Liberal Guilt and our Next President
>>>>>>>>The allure of Obama is not any of his demonstrated leadership qualities or his economic or foreign policy ideas. As piece after piece in the conservative press and some in the blogosphere have pointed out, Obama has very little experience for the presidency, and his claims to be able to unite the country are particularly disingenuous in light of his voting record as a hard line liberal. Yet none of this is discussed by the main stream media.>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>There are enough dichotomous issues about Obama to fill a laundry list, with the most discordant being Obama’s claim to be a post racial candidate while adopting as a preacher and mentor for twenty years the lunatic racist Rev. Wright. Then there is Obama’s claim to be able to heal the bi-partisan divide of the country while never having once in his career attempted to reach across the aisle on an issue of bi-partisan controversy. And there is Obama’s claim that he will clean Washington of special interests even as he panders shamelessly to Democratic special interests for their support.>>>>>
_____________________________
Factcheck.org
Obama's Creative Clippings
January 3, 2008
Selective, embellished and out-of-context quotes from newspapers pump up Obama's health plan.
More NAFTA Nonsense
March 3, 2008
An Obama mailer uses dubious, disputed statistics about how much the trade deal hurt Ohio workers.
Substance Abuse
April 1, 2008
A widely forwarded e-mail claims that Obama's bills are more substantive and numerous than Clinton's. Don't believe it.
Senator Obama has one of the worst records for getting bills passed that he has sponsored in the US Senate. That sounds like experience most of us wouldn’t want. The Senator has sponsored and passed 2 Bills in the US Senate - one for the Congo (shock and awe?) and one that makes lobbyists stand when they eat. Impressive work for 4 years on the job.
John McCain has sponsored 537 bills since Jan 21, 1993, of which 340 haven't made it out of committee and 31 were successfully enacted (Exceedingly Good, relative to peers). McCain has co-sponsored 1211 bills during the same time period.
___________________________
Obama's List of Demonstrable Lies: 77 and growing
Obama WTF >>> is the most comprehensive and authoritative site about the life, votes, and positions of Senator Obama and his political backers. As his campaign is based on words... not on a proven track-record... if his words are not supported by facts, there’s nothing left but an empty blue suit>>>>>>>
I found this site extremely interesting and devoted to counteract the "messianic" character of the Obama campaign. This website specializes on examining Senator Obama in-debth.
_______________________________________
Obama's Senatorial History: "Starpower - Minor Role"
See clearly evidenced, how this candidate always rather campained than legislate. He loves to campain, but hates to govern. Using the Seanate as a stepping stone in a 5 year plan for the Presidency. Absence on tough decision votes.....it's not me, it is MSNBC, after all a Democratic oriented media which has been very tough on Clinton.
_________________________
Obama enjoys unfair advantage in media coverage.
Up to 90% of the coverage positive? 50% with Clinton and McCain? What's wrog with this picture?
MEDIA BOOST OBAMA, BASH “BILLARY”
Once again it is evident that the intelligent voter cannot just believe the media, but must make up his own mind, based upon cold hard facts. Do not make the mistake and easily dismiss people like Bill O'Reilly or Brit Hume of Fox News, as their coverage is fact based and fresh in terms of being inquisitive. Watch the shows and make up your own mind. Objective research shows clear evidence of a way more balanced coverage than CNS, ABC, CNN, NBC.
---------------------------
NewsWeek ( one of the most liberal Media after all) posted now an article raising serious questions as to the gap between rhetoric and substance.
___________________
Obama supporter can not name one of Obama's accomplishments :
And that's a state government official, for God's sake. A professional politician who terribly failed at naming just one single accomplishment......
I invite all of you Obama supporters to do the very same test and ask your fellow supporters the very same question: Name one major factual accomplishment.......
And then, when the silence becomes really loud, ask yourself what evidence you have to see Obama deliver in the future? Why would anyone in his/her right mind bet the country on these odds?
_____________
Guilt by Association?
First let us define this notion.
Here an analysis based upon the legal interpretation of Guilt By Associacion:
Obama and the Wright-Wing Conspiracy
by Bill Siegel >>>>>>>>>>>
..................................
Obama Pastor: God Damn America
The evidence is appalling, shocking, disgusting and revealing. Sad, tragic evidence for the often mentioned reverse Racism, practised by his church.
(Silently practised by Obama as well?) For 20 years Obama was indoctrinated by this very Reverend.
Why - I ask you - would Obama possibly attend the sermons again and again over two decades, if he did not agree with the position of this church and this specific Preacher? It took me one sermon to leave a congreagtioin for another....
Please watch with awe below video and make up your own mind. if you do not come to the conclusion that it sounds very much like the hate filled yelling by the fanatic fundamentalist Mullah out of Birmingham, preaching hate against Christianity, all infidels and the western world, you are beyond help.
.........................................
Shocking Video Evidence:
See Reverend Jeremiah Wright in his own words. Preaching Hate!
Can you really picture even one member of this unbelievable congregation being actually in power or having a position of influence? Can you really? Will you believe that Obama did not know after 20 years of listening to this man? Talking about judgement.... and the cowardice of only responding, after these videos surfaced... How can any decent American patriot listen to these insults, to this hate, to this distortion of historical facts, to this crapping all over the dead souls of soldiers bleeding for the freedom of this country and others since WWII, and not walk out of this church in disgust and outrage? And even after hearing and seeing this shocking evidence not "disowning" this Nazi, but give us a lofty lecture about the racial divide in this country? How can anyone in his right mind even consider voting for this man?
For God's sake - we are talking President Of The United States here!!!
All of a sudden, Michelle Obama's statements about her pride in this country (see video below) appear to be in a logical context
______________
America created the Aids Virus to eradicate the black man....
Jeremiah Wright sounds suspiciously like this Radical Muslim Fanatic
....................................
Classic Example of Bigotry and reverse racism:
Hillary was never called a Nigger!
Reverse Racism at work. I rest my case. So it is okay to use the N word, just as long as of course the person uttering it is black? God help us, if a white, latino or Asian ever dared to use the same language.....
Let us be clear here - I am not talking about a one time statement here. No simple slip of the tongue. This is a continously repeated message of anti-semitism, hate against America, a message Obama has been listening to for over 20 years, which makes this so concerning and as a minimum leaves some serious questions and doubts about Obama's so oftenmentioned and celebrated judgement....
..............................................
But - do not just take my word - here a link to an excellent analysis submitted by a friend out of Europe:
Uncle Jeremiah
Barack Obama and his cookie-cutter race huckster.
By Mark Steyn
Did Obama consider God Damn America as a title for his book but it didn’t focus-group so well?>>>God has blessed America, and blessed the Obamas in America, and even blessed the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, whose bashing of his own country would be far less lucrative anywhere else on the planet. The “racist” here is not Geraldine Ferraro but the Reverend Wright, whose appeals to racial bitterness are supposed to be everything President Obama will transcend>>>>
..................................................
Pastor Halts Obama's Rise Above Identity Politics
by Ross Kaminsky
>>>>>>it seems an odd coincidence that just over one month after Obama announced his campaign for the presidency, the church altered its “About Us” page on its web site, eliminating the discussion of a “Black Value System,” which included such concepts as “Adherence to the Black Work Ethic,” “Disavowal of the Pursuit of ‘Middleclassness,’” and “Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System.”>>>>>
__________________________
More about Obama's Congregation
If that's not scary in terms of (reverse) racism.....
......................................................
Obama's Speech
>>>> His decades-long embrace of Wright, seemingly untempered by any serious qualms about what his pastor represents politically, suggests that he isn’t willing to confront the rhetoric of division and polarization within his own community, let alone in the country as whole. Which in turn suggests that that far from being the man who will tell us what we need to hear, rather than what we want to hear, he's a go-along-to-get-along figure, a man who accepts The Way Things Are and doesn't rock the boat. In other words, that he's just another politician>>>>>>
The above was written before the speech was given, and is 100% congruent with my own personal opinion. Today I heard the speech and the writer was confirmed.
While once again the man wiggles out from under any form of accountability or guilt, let alone for once being humble (quality of great leaders)apologizing for the long association with this black Nazi,, he delivers once again proof for being one of the most gifted politicians in recent history and so, once again, nothing sticks to this so immensly polished and smooth surface. I read through many reactions to the speech and it does seem that many of our so gullible populus have bought the coolaid yet again. No matter what happens, Obama will by no means apologize. he will spin, twist and torque any issue to the extent it will fit to this transcendent blurp of hope and change again. And people just keep on sipping the nectar from his lips.
Just for a second - let us turn this around and assume that a White Senator of the US would have only a few times and not 20 years attended the sermons of David Duke of the Ku Klux Clan. I mean, the statements of Wright are about as controversial, divisive and outrageous as the ones of the KuKlux Clan, right?
Do you believe that this Senator would still have a political future? He would have resigned the very same day of breaking the news.
So - why are we applying once again a different set of moral and ethical standards, when a black man is concerned? Aren't the statements of Wright as despicable as the ones voiced by David Duke?
Wouldn't America call immediately for utter condemnation of this hypothetical white Senator? Why is this not happening with a black senator who not only calls this man a spiritual advisor and friend for over 20 years, is married by him, has his kids baptized by him and even after the material is published is not disowning the man? Why is this double standard applied?
Nobody would ever doubt that there is guilt by association, if the above hypothetical example would occur. Any politician associated with such fanatics as the Clan would be crucified. Yet, in the case of Obama, associated with a reverend who's rantings are as terrible as any of Islamic fundamentalists or any White Power Right Wing Nut, kid's gloves are applied and the media is is surprisiingly silent.... it is illogical, it does not make sense, it is not fair - it is against any fundamental priciple of our democracy - it is - once again Reverse Racism, sadly so prevalent in our society.
______________
Obama's Speech Leaves a Few Question Marks
By Charles Krauthammer
>>>>>>>The question is why didn't he leave that church? Why didn't he leave -- why doesn't he leave even today -- a pastor who thundered not once but three times from the pulpit (on a DVD the church proudly sells) "God damn America"? Obama's 5,000-word speech, fawned over as a great meditation on race, is little more than an elegantly crafted, brilliantly sophistic justification of that scandalous dereliction. >>>>>
______________
Does Race matter? Is it politically correct to point out the obvious?
Playing by Obama's Rules
by Patrick J. Buchanan
A great analysis about Reverse Racism.
.............................
Some information about Obama's Background In Chicago from an objective, British Perspective, read the article of the reputable LONDON TIMES:
Barack Obama: toxic mentors start to corrode pristine campaign
_______________
Do you know Obama's actual voting record in the senate?
Here the detailed voting record as proof - Make up your own mind:
Please take notice of the amazing amount of NV - Not Voting, Excused, Absent, or Present to some of the most critical issues.........
_______________
Proud of her country?????
Did you see Michelle Obama state that she is now for the first time in her entire adult life proud of our country? A slap in the face of many people living through extremely hard times. Is that the kind of first family we would like to see?
No after the fact press conference will be able to spin this one..... watch for yourself and you be the judge. 
_________________
I subscribe to The Economist, a fair and independent British Weekly, respected worldwide.
Can Obama Deliver?
________________
Obama's Oil Spill
Obama says he doesn't take money from oil companies. Really?
Factcheck.org says that's a little too slick. (Newsweek)
_________________
Anyone not voting for Barack Obama is bitter?
At issue are comments he made privately at a fundraiser in San Francisco last Sunday. He was trying to explain his troubles winning over some working-class voters, saying they have become frustrated with economic conditions:
"It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
End Quote!
Once again Obama stereotypes and demeans Americans. Anyone who does not vote for him is brushed aside with cliches, as he stereotyped the typical white person.
Does it slowly start to penetrate, that this man is arrogant and elitist? That there is an overall mindset he so far successfully hides?
And once again, there was afterwards no humble apology offered, but just an apology for "a poor choice of words". When will he finally have the backbone and accept responsibility and be truly accountable for his actions and words?
What a pathetic contrast to John McCain who always had the courage to stand before the American People and apologize for a mistake.
____________
Reverend Wrights full speech to the NAA -
Part I
PART II
PART III
The mindset is absolutely scary - Only upon this speech did Obama finally issue a strong rebuttal.
That is weak and once again the typical response of a politician.
__________
Obama's Changing Moral Equivalence
By Charles Krauthammer
>>>> Obama's newest attempt to save himself after Wright's latest poisonous performance is now declared the new final word on the subject. Therefore, any future ads linking Obama and Wright are pre-emptively declared out of bounds, illegitimate, indeed "race-baiting"(New York Times editorial, April 30).>>>
....................................................
Most of all:
God Bless America
Posts
