Barack Obama: Why I believe he should be the next President. (From the Mayor of London)
Peiper, please forgive me for adding comments on top of your comments, but this article is too rich a source of foolishness to not dissect a little more.
Barack Obama: Why he should be US President
An Obama win could signify the end of race-based politicsIn case anyone hasn’t noticed, race based politics is only kept alive by the likes of Sharpton and Jackson. The rest of us have gotten used to the idea that all men are created equal. You can take it another way too; Obama could not have gotten as far as he has if race based politics had any remaining significance here in America.
It would be tough for any candidate to receive the Republican baton from Dubya, and McCain can be proud of doing as well as he is.
Why does everyone link McCain with GWB? McCain has frequently been a problem to Bush. Politically there is little love lot between the two.
His chief selling-point is his grasp of foreign affairs, and his staunch belligerence in the pursuit of American interests.
OK, so even this dingleberry acknowledges that the chief selling point for McCain is that he knows what he’s doing in foreign affairs. This leaves Obama where? I’m 100% with Peiper - why isn’t the President of the United States supposed to put the best interests of the United States first?
If elections were decided on the ruthless efficiency of campaigns, then Obama would already have it in the bag.
No kidding. Obama is a product of Chicago machine politics. The toughest, best organized and most corrupt political/criminal enterprise in American history.
But then again, he is patently not the Marxist subversive loony Lefty that some of his detractors allege.
Marxist subversive loony lefty could only apply if Obama had any real principles. Obama is like so many, in it for his own benefit and ego. If he can make a buck, acquire a little more influence or otherwise build himself up, screw the rest of us.
Obama deserves to win because he seems talented, compassionate, and because he offers the hope of rejuvenating the greatest country on earth in the eyes of the rest of us. All those are sufficient reasons for desiring his victory.
How is he going to rejuvenate the U.S. if he doesn’t represent our interests?
His opinion of Republicans:
“The recent collapse of the banking system, and the humiliating resort to semi-socialist solutions, has done a great deal to discredit - in some people’s eyes - the idea of free-market capitalism.”
I can buy that one… but that can’t be tied to President Bush, that’s the work of the Democrats in Congress since 1992, enacting a program started by President Clinton.
“His chief selling-point is his grasp of foreign affairs, and his staunch belligerence in the pursuit of American interests.”
And electing an American President who is belligerent in pursuit of American interests is a bad thing *why*, exactly?
His opinion of Obama:
“He seems highly intelligent. He has an air of courtesy and sincerity.”
“Unlike his opponent, he visibly incarnates change and hope, at a time when America desperately needs both.”
“Obama deserves to win because he seems talented, compassionate, and because he offers the hope of rejuvenating the greatest country on earth in the eyes of the rest of us.”Notice the recurring use of the word “seems”. It is the operative word in most of his statements. In other words, this man admits he doesn’t actually KNOW what Obama stands for, he thinks Obama should win *because he makes a good impression*, because he SEEMS to want the same things those watching him want.
As Obama said of himself, “I am new enough on the national political screen that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripe project their own views.” Or in short, seeing “Hope” and “Change” in Obama has precisely the same significance as seeing a herd of galloping horses in a cloudbank. And basing your vote on the perceived reality of said hope and change makes precisely as much sense as spending thousands of dollars putting fencing in a dome over your property, to keep the cloud horses out of your yard.“He needs to stick up more vigorously for free trade,and we must hope that any ill-considered new taxes will be thwarted by Congress.”
He *claims* to be for free trade, but what he has actually SUPPORTED is its opposite. Stop listening to the sales pitch and actually read the fine print. With any other candidate, you’d ignore what he *claims* and look at how he VOTES. Why is Obama the sole exception to this rule?
And “any ill-considered new taxes will be thwarted by Congress”? With a Democrat majority? Did you think about just how ludicrous a statement you made here? You think about that one while I pick myself up off the floor and recover my composure. And thanks, by the way, I needed a good belly laugh.“...and it is not really clear that he [Ayers] and Obama are chums at all.”
Well, I guess you could make that argument. But only if you could make the same argument that Bush is not a chum of, say, Karl Rove.
“Huge numbers of voters, whether they admit it to themselves or not, will hesitate to choose Barack Obama for President because he is black. And then there are millions of white Americans who will undoubtedly vote Obama precisely because he is black...”
Okay, first you claim to read minds. If someone objects to Obama because of his past, or his lies, or his corrupt machine politics, that’s not the REAL reason they don’t like him, it’s *really* because they’re racist. Of course, the fact that I would happily vote for Clarence Thomas or Condi Rice before Ted Kennedy or John Kerry doesn’t signify, I’m still racist. Uh-huh.
Of course, you completely avoid the FACT that 97% of blacks are voting for him, that many if not most are voting for him BECAUSE he’s black. But apparently, being openly racist is okay in your eyes.... unless you’re white.
But then, to put the cherry on top of this remarkable assertion, “If Obama wins, then the United States will have at last come a huge and maybe decisive step closer to achieving the dream of Martin Luther King, of a land where people are judged not on the colour of their skin but by the content of their character.”Okay, run that one by me again.... if a white person votes against him, it will be ASSUMED, with no evidence whatsoever, that it is because of racism, even though the spread among whites is fairly even. If a black person votes for him, either the black person’s racism doesn’t matter, or the black person isn’t REALLY racist, even though the black demographic support of him approaches 100%. And yet if he wins in spite of the *assumed* racism of whites and the documentable racism of blacks, this will mean he was elected not because he was black, but because he was a corrupt, opportunist machine politician with strong socialist leanings and a liking for the company of those who hate America, in short because of his character.
Um, yeronner.... I think maybe you are late taking your meds.
Err sorry about this folks, I too am gutted by Boris, he seemed like a conservative, funny should conservatives not be on the WWF list of endangered species? It looks like reading is off the menu too, I had a look with Mr Google and up came the peanut farmer and his fellow socialists as root cause of the US banking woes and then up pops the EU for ours (do I detect a slight left wing connection here, and is it a policy mistake or success??) S0 Boris, in the unlikely event you read this, if infact you can read, you are catastrophically wrong , do some research and then say sorry.
Posted by Chris Edwards
10/22/2008 at 04:09 PM
10/21/2008 at 07:58 AM
