You guys don’t like Obama only because he is the ANTICHRIST!
Well sure, there’s that.
You guys don’t like Obama only because he is the ANTICHRIST!
Details, details.
My understanding (which I haven’t bothered to verify) is that his congregation in Illinois is run by a nutcase.
It will be interesting to see if (assuming he gets the Democratic nod) the media ever hold his feet to the fire about what he means by “change.”
I thought about it, and I lost a bit more respect for him for choosing my college as the starting point in his new little campaign. He stated that he started here because of the crucial importance of northeast Ohio.
That’s bullshit.
He came here because 75% of Youngstown is black.
Did anyone else see this? I fell out of my chair laughing…“I’ll give you one last shot. Name one of his accomplishments, now.”
Well, that pretty much sums up the Obama presidential bid, doesn’t it? Lots of smoke, mirrors and vague generalities…
Did anyone else see this? I fell out of my chair laughing…“I’ll give you one last shot. Name one of his accomplishments, now.”
While I think Obama would be a terrible President, his failure to sponsor any new legislation is hardly a strike against him. Sure, repealing a few laws would be nice. But if the entire legislature followed his example and simply sat out the session without passing a single new bill, it would be a monumental improvement over the Democratic-Republican rule we’ve known for the past century and a half.
Did anyone else see this? I fell out of my chair laughing…“I’ll give you one last shot. Name one of his accomplishments, now.”
Chris Matthews Crucifies Flustered Obama Backer
As amusing as this was - I was more angered by Chris Matthews and his outright blatant support of Hillary Clinton. So much for unbiased journalists. CNN and liberals want to blast Fox News for claiming to be “fair and balanced” when they have conservative bias, but then will shout up and down about how UN-biased CNN is. It’s just laughable and total hypocrisy
The congresswoman’s claims that Hillary has a long list of legislative achievements was laughable as well.
As amusing as this was - I was more angered by Chris Matthews and his outright blatant support of Hillary Clinton. So much for unbiased journalists. CNN and liberals want to blast Fox News for claiming to be “fair and balanced” when they have conservative bias, but then will shout up and down about how UN-biased CNN is. It’s just laughable and total hypocrisy
I have little regard for Chris Matthews, but I don’t think he pretends to be anything other than a political commentator. In the words of his official website, he “brings a powerful and influential political commentary to ‘The Chris Matthews Show.’” Link here. I’m not aware of any claim being made that Matthews is less biased than Fox’s Hannity or O’Reilly.
In any case, those who have followed Matthews know that he is anything but pro-Hillary. This from Wikipedia:
Matthews has been highly critical of Hillary Clinton, especially during her 2008 candidacy for President. The left-wing watchdog group Media Matters for America has chronicled his overwhelmingly negative comments on Clinton from September through November 2007.
It will be interesting to see if Obama can beat Hillary in Ohio and Texas. She’s currently winning in both states, according to the polls. My guess is that he’ll end up with a narrow victory in Ohio and she’ll win in TX.
As amusing as this was - I was more angered by Chris Matthews and his outright blatant support of Hillary Clinton. So much for unbiased journalists. CNN and liberals want to blast Fox News for claiming to be “fair and balanced” when they have conservative bias, but then will shout up and down about how UN-biased CNN is. It’s just laughable and total hypocrisy
It’s worse for Fox because they do have “fair and balanced” and “We report. You decide.” Like they are actually kidding someone. With CNN if I turn it on right now I’m bound to see something newsworthy and some general discussion about it. If I turn on Fox, I’m bound to see something geared towards a Republican voting audience, with completetly dumb-downed commentary about it or something totally unnewsworthy like “Britney Spears was caught with her pants off again! Now lets bring in our discussion panel to explain how this makes America look bad and is the fault of evil Godless liberals!”
:lol:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xtNr5-up0U
A great video featuring Cake’s song " Building a New Religion " mocking the cult following of Obama
Three attacks that will be used against Obama, if he is the nominee:
- He is corrupt. While his message of change is empty at the level of political philosophy, the bigger attack will be that his message of change is bogus at the level of character. He is a typical corrupt politician. His deal with Rezko clearly show corruption. This kernel will be expanded, pointing out ties to Iraq. (ref: IBD Editorial)
- He is too far to the left. While everyone understands that Obama is from the left, he has tried to position himself less to the left than Hillary on the issue of health-care. However, when his sponsorship of the “Global Poverty Act” becomes more widely known, it is likely to paint him as pretty far left.
- He is a racist. Huge majorities within the black community have voted for Obama in the primaries. Nevertheless, he has an image of not being a racist. In fact, people find him appealing because they find him calmly articulate. His close association with the minister will hurt him here. He’s trying to disavow this, but I don’t think too many people can buy this disavowal, when Obama has attended the church for years, has been married by this man, had his kids baptised by him, etc.
- He is a racist. Huge majorities within the black community have voted for Obama in the primaries. Nevertheless, he has an image of not being a racist. In fact, people find him appealing because they find him calmly articulate. His close association with the minister will hurt him here. He’s trying to disavow this, but I don’t think too many people can buy this disavowal, when Obama has attended the church for years, has been married by this man, had his kids baptised by him, etc.
I think you’re right that heretofore Obama’s appeal to many white people was that he’s black and didn’t obviously dislike whites, as seems to have been the case with a Jackson or a Sharpton during their presidential bids. However, if you listen to Reverend Wright/Wrong, this man is clearly a paranoid racist who seems to be coming from a black separatist perspective.
I would think that most fans of Obama are going to have a hard time swallowing his rhetoric. The Reverend’s diatribes are going to be hugely damaging to the Obama campaign among white voters, as his denunciations of Wright’s more radical statements have been fairly weak so far. Obama claims that he didn’t personally see any of the sermons given by the Reverend. I find that implausible. I wonder if that church uses pew registries where you sign a book to evidence your attendance at a given sermon? Could be trouble for Barak.
Here’s an interesting scenario. Assume Clinton wins in Pennsylvania and this entire contest comes down to the super delegates. Assume further that the super delegates mostly go with Clinton and she gets the nomination. At this point, in order to heal what is going to be a very divided and pissed off Democratic party, Clinton has to ask Obama to be on the ticket with her. However, what if Obama’s Reverend Wright problem proves to be so damaging that he’s more of a liability than an asset on the ticket? Does she go with someone else, causing many blacks to stay home and strengthening McCain’s chances in the general election?
Here’s an interesting scenario. Assume Clinton wins in Pennsylvania and this entire contest comes down to the super delegates. Assume further that the super delegates mostly go with Clinton and she gets the nomination. At this point, in order to heal what is going to be a very divided and pissed off Democratic party, Clinton has to ask Obama to be on the ticket with her. However, what if Obama’s Reverend Wright problem proves to be so damaging that he’s more of a liability than an asset on the ticket? Does she go with someone else, causing many blacks to stay home and strengthening McCain’s chances in the general election?
I think the claims of a “Dream Ticket” with Hillary and Barak (or as I call it, the Rodham-Hussein Ticket) is only a dream for McCain. Ole’Mama and Obama are diametrically opposite in all facets of their ideology except statism. Clinton is a pretty aggressive hawk internationally, while Obama wants to slash the military and dismantle nuclear weaponry. (Either way, you get to play war) Clinton offers the impression of cold, calculating political savvy, while Obama’s idealistic campaign offers a tasty pablum of hope and change (It’s subjectively delicious!). Clinton offers “you’re goddamned right, I will” to Obama’s “yes we can.”
If you like one, you have to hate the other. While this may play okay to Democrats, who have become accustomed over the past eight years to pinching their nose and gulping down whatever lump of excrement the party passes for a candidate, the independents and teetering Republicans are probably going to rationalize their votes based on McCain’s running mate (whoever it might be, as long as it ain’t Huck), and hope the 71 yr-old geezer kicks off before he tantrums us all into WWIII. (or is it IV? V? … I lost count)
Three attacks that will be used against Obama, if he is the nominee:
- He is corrupt. While his message of change is empty at the level of political philosophy, the bigger attack will be that his message of change is bogus at the level of character. He is a typical corrupt politician. His deal with Rezko clearly show corruption. This kernel will be expanded, pointing out ties to Iraq. (ref: IBD Editorial)
- He is too far to the left. While everyone understands that Obama is from the left, he has tried to position himself less to the left than Hillary on the issue of health-care. However, when his sponsorship of the “Global Poverty Act” becomes more widely known, it is likely to paint him as pretty far left.
- He is a racist. Huge majorities within the black community have voted for Obama in the primaries. Nevertheless, he has an image of not being a racist. In fact, people find him appealing because they find him calmly articulate. His close association with the minister will hurt him here. He’s trying to disavow this, but I don’t think too many people can buy this disavowal, when Obama has attended the church for years, has been married by this man, had his kids baptised by him, etc.
Not just racism, but the anti-Americanism. The pastor gave a speech after 911 where he said something like “God Damn America” … and “chickens coming home to roost.” This guy is more than a pastor, he’s a spiritual mentor to OBama and has been for 20 some odd years and he’s an advisor on OBama’s campaign presently.
So, we have Socialism + Racism + Virulent Anti-Americanism. Not a good concoction that one.
Really, it also shows OBama to be deceptive as hell.
Blacks who support him because he’s black better realize that electing a guy because he’s black is not a good idea. You elect a guy for his ideas. And, for crying out loud, I wish so many blacks weren’t so left wing!
The pastor gave a speech after 911 where he said something like “God Damn America”
What type of “pastor” would even dream of using the words “God Damn” from the pulpit? I suspect he is less a pastor than he is a proponent of Socialism + Racism + Virulent Anti-Americanism hiding behind the cloth.
And, for crying out loud, I wish so many blacks weren’t so left wing!
I have never understood that either. You would think that if ever there was a race or group of people that would value the pursit of liberty, it would be black Americans. Yet they seem to be the biggest proponents of statism. It seems that rather than pursuing their own freedom, they wish to see shackles on everyone.
Not just racism, but the anti-Americanism. [Jeremiah Wright] gave a speech after 911 where he said something like “God Damn America” … and “chickens coming home to roost.” This guy is more than a pastor, he’s a spiritual mentor to Obama and has been for 20 some odd years and he’s an advisor on Obama’s campaign presently.
Jeremiah Wright is incredibly racist and anti-United States. The Reverend is also is an associate of Louis Farrakhan, who is the head of the racist and religious organization Nation of Islam. Moreover, Reverend Wright advances absolutely ludicrous conspiracy theories. He promotes the theory that the U.S. government invented and disseminated the HIV virus to commit genocide against blacks. See a little after 3:00 on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uY28l6HoKww. I find it shocking that a crowd as large as that is shown in the video takes this nonsense seriously. This is on the level of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s holocaust denial.
Senator Obama allegedly attended this guys church over 20 years with his wife and his two daughters as well as donated over $20,000 to Reverend Wright’s church. In all fairness, Senator Obama issued a lukewarm apology for his association with Reverend Wright. Senator Obama also gave a universal condemnation over all of Reverend Wright’s controversial remarks.
However, the issue that Senator Obama needs to clarify (I have not heard him do so) is what value could Barack Obama possibly have gained from listening to Reverend Wright for twenty years? I see no objective value in listening to this monster whatsoever. One possibly explanation is that Barack Obama is secretly incredibly racist and anti-United States but is amazingly good at hiding it. More likely, it just shows that he disgustingly places such a small value on ideas and their connection to living life that Reverend Wright’s perverse rhetoric never offended him to cause him and his family to severe all ties with this church. Any rational person would have distanced himself from Reverend Wright a long time ago.
Ideas are important. I highly doubt that Barack Obama could call Reverend Wright his spiritual leader for over twenty years and not absorb some of the philosophical poison that he spouts. It looks like Barack Obama is more of an abysmal abomination than we ever imagined.
… Senator Obama needs to clarify (I have not heard him do so) is what value could Barack Obama possibly have gained from listening to Reverend Wright for twenty years?…
At best, I suspect that Obama was going the normal route of many black politicians, building himself up as a black politician, via his various contacts and his church attendance. The talk of him running for president, after his speech to the Democratic convention, might have taken him a bit by surprise. He’s smart enough to know that he would have to appear more mainstream. This explains why he would drop Wright as the person to pray at/bless the announcement of his candidacy. Chances are that he had already thought through the speech he might give when his ties to Wright made the headlines. At best, that type of pragmatic political approach explains it.
I’m not sure if that explains the spiritual guide part, though. So, it’s likely that Obama actually has some racist ideas of his own.
The sliver of silver lining: young black Democratic politicians are now on notice that the white-house is something they can really aim for. They know that Jesse Jackson types can never make it, and some people said that the first black president might have to be someone not suspected of being too far left (i.e. someone like Colin Powell). Obama’s candidacy shows that a black Democrat has a real shot at the Presidency, but the one thing he cannot be suspected of is being too racist. I think this is true even if Obama wins.
Shackling the individual by imposing racist pride
Here is a good article that discusses Obama and Multiculturalism. Its kind of a strange hodgepodge of ideas and quotes, but it does have some Andrew Bernstien remarks in it.
The more Americans hear this man who’s been an influential part of Obama’s life for two decades, the more they’re going to have the audacity to look beyond Obama’s inspirational milquetoast speeches, probing what makes him tick, what influences him, who advises him, what he believes.