Pol-O-tics, As Usual

Let's see what the O-man has been up to, shall we?

Breaking his promise on public financing.

Oh, and he's been caught shoving some supporters under the carpet because they were wearing head scarves.

He's had to distance himself from any number of controversial and even criminal elements from his recent past. And get his wife a makeover, to boot.

He all but admitted to deceiving voters on his NAFTA stance.

And his mounting number of serious gaffes the media tends to downplay make Bush look like a political scholar, no matter how much the Left would seek to unjustly run down Bush's intelligence.

Does Obama represent change you simply can't believe in? Or change not even worth taking seriously? The juries out, but clearly he doesn't represent much new or positive when it comes to political leadership in this country.

The man's a joke. And if he weren't black, Hillary would have knocked him out early so he could get back to being the partisan hack and Senate back bencher he's barely qualified to be.

I almost feel bad for the idiots who are going to pin their hopes on this guy the media is going to bust a gut to get elected. Even if he is elected, he'll make Carter almost look like an average failed President.

Comments

[Worst President Ever]

So Seek, if you're REALLY worried about Statism, you might watch what Bush and his cronies have been doing. If it were up to them they'd just completely shred the constitution and turn the US into a police state so we could be safe from terrorists. You know, listen to all phone calls, read all emails, kinda like they were doing. I guess the terrorist wouldn't hate us for our freedom then.

Right now, 15% may be a bit high, but if McSame continues to campaign as a Bush III administration, it may start looking too low. He's got no new ideas, has flip-flopped on pretty much every major issue, doesn't have as much money, is a lousy public speaker, has a demoralized Republican party, and can't even secure his own base. Really, after Bush's performance, who would anyone vote to give these guys another four years?

Plus, Obama may actually change the electoral map - he's running even in places - Virginia and Georgia - that have been republican strong-holds. So I like Obama's chances a hell of a lot better than McSame's.

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/06/19/mccain_obama_georgia.html

[seekeronos]

"--- ZOMG! Barack Obama is going to kill 10 million of his own people in a series of cultural revolutions. The good news is that he'll also start stockpiling hydrogen bombs and expanding the US sphere of influence throughout eastern europe. ---"

Nah, we don't necessarily need to stockpile any more nukes (assuming of course, that Obama doesn't leave Ahmadinejad to his own devices - pun intended - and 2016 sees us with a heavily nuclear proliferated Middle East.

And we will have many people dying - not necessarily from the physical death that touches us all, but a really increased spread of the spiritual decay and administration-sponsored hatred for the things of Christ and for the Republic that will see us moved much further to the Euro-socialist Left that Bush could ever have dreamed of when moving us to the fascist (statist) right.

BitterCling, though a handy term to describe Obama's (and most of the rest of the Democratic Party Elites' attitude toward the majority of us bumpkins who make up this great country) is a real thing: one could almost cut the palpable snobbishness and loathing dripping from Obama's statements against people who "cling to God (their Bibles) and their guns".

We do so not so much out of any bitterness, but because we know that to cling to God and His Words will save us from fiery Hell if we trust in Him, and we cling to our guns, our "Liberty Teeth" as they are, to protect us from the tyranny of such self-important demagogues who would impose themselves over us by sly words and deceitful tongues and broken promises.

"--- Really, after 8 years of domestic wiretapping, consolidation of one party rule, foreign imperialist incursions, secret military prisons, and torture, I would think that a new Stalin would be right up your alley for President. ---"

I never said that Bush was a winner either. In fact, I rather despise what has become of his administration. And I think McCain is as much ill-suited for the Presidency as Obama. Both men are liars/oath-breakers, and will lead us down the path toward the dissolution of the Republic by their divisive actions (Obama through his mucking about with race and ID politics, and McCain by having closed door meetings with "La Raza", a group of terrorists committed to carving up the USA and reversing 160-year old treaties.

What we need is a president - and congressmen - who will return us to Constitutional Rule. I'm inclined to think that it is indeed too late for this nation-turned-empire, and that in about 30 years, if that, we will walk the same path as the Soviet Union did by fragmenting into several smaller regional powers, perhaps with the USA being a larger rump state holding many of the nukes.

Or I could be totally wrong, if the usual slippery-slope logic applies here to all the Generation-Y folks and Millennials (age 18-28) and the broad base of Generation X'ers who support Obama will lead to the long-expected lurch toward Euro-Socialism for the next 40 years, the same way that FDR appealed to the youth of the 1930s and JFK to the trailing edge of "Silent Generation in the 1960s.

In which case the trend toward godlessness and immorality and acceptance of once forbidden and vile practices becomes quite acceptable: things like animal personhood and the subsequent acceptableness of Bestiality and animal-human marriage, gay marriage being the law of the land, polygamy and polyamory being normalized, and perhaps even NAMBLA getting its way and allowing pederasty to exist under the false pretense of "providing stable role models for young men" or some other hideous thing like that.

Not all CHANGE is good. While we celebrate the freedom of people of all different colours and ethnicities to marry and breed as they see fit (this is actually a very good thing for the human genome), where a black or Asian man can bring forth offspring within the bounds of holy matrimony with a white woman....

...two men marrying or two women marrying serve little useful societal purpose other than the arrogation of the same aura of respectability and endorsement by the state (the state should have no business "granting permission" for marriage, gay or otherwise) and getting the tax bennies from it.

Worse still will be the likely progression down the road to Sodom when people start demanding the right to marry minor children (the LDS cult in TX can expect to be vindicated on that in the future) or marry their pet dog or joint marriages in groups.

Perversion unrestrained knows no bounds, and leads to the destruction of that nation.

"--- I mean - you've got your genocide in Afghanistan and Iraq, you've got your arresting of rival political leaders like Bog Seigler in Alabama... ---"

I'm with you on that. Both wars are constitutionally unlawful, and fall under the purview of the President's self-arrogated extra-constitutional "war powers". Although to some extent, the genocides under the Taliban and Saddam Hussein were pretty significant even without US involvement. As for "Bog Seigler", I didn't find anyone matching your description of an arrested political leader in AL.

There is a Ben Seigler in Hampton Roads, VA being detained and otherwise having his life destroyed by the Feds for allegedly bilking people out of millions of dollars as a fake pastor. Did you mean him?

"--- ... you've got your rigged elections in Florida and Ohio, you've got your erosion of civil rights and increasing irrelevance of the legislative and judicial bodies, No-Fly lists that restrict citizens virtually at random, gulags in Cuba and Eastern Europe, industry execs and ranking senators all bowing to the same masters, "government" companies like Blackwater and Haliburton subsist on handouts from Washington and provide garbage services - what am I missing? I mean, shxx. What is Obama going to do that will be more Stalin-like than the current President? Seriously, what am I missing? Universal health care? ---"

I think you've nailed down pretty well. Can't say we can complain much about election fraud, as both parties have done their share, and this election will likely prove no different, except to favour the Democrats this time around. Although I believe that Obama has this election in the bag what with the way the press has been pumping him up non-stop (with the exception of Tim Russert Week) and generally ignoring McCain except to mildly poke at him, and pretending that the 3rd Party candidates don't even exist.

As for the other stuff, if you honestly think that Obama is going to do away with all the stuff that made Bush's power with a GOP congress nearly god-like... Obama with a 75%+ Donkey Kongress will become even more drunk with power. He might close down or scale back one or more operations to make it seem like he is doing something to correct Bush's overreaching, but rest assured that Obama will replace them with something equally unconstitutional or worse.

"--- //-- Of course, that's almost as believable as Hillary stepping in with her connections within the Mossad and MI-6 step in and set someone up on a grassy knoll somewhere to take care of her "affirmative action problem". --//

Shorter Seek: Assassination fantasies! *wank* *wank* *wank* Ahhhhh, now I feel better. ---"

Oh, c'mon Moe. Don'tcha recognize snark when you see it? You have quite the record for snarkiness, I figger'd you'da seen right off.

[SacTownMan]

Damn Lame-O, in your rambling, paranoiac moonbat litany you forgot that Bush was responsible for the controlled demolition of the WTC towers. I can't believe you could miss that one! Every moonbat knows that steel can't melt like that!

President Carter, You have got to come-up with something better than moonbat talking point #1 (McCain = Bush 3). Maybe you could ask Soros for a little pay raise to finish your high school education!

[jharp]

So harp, which is it. Did you not read the article before commenting or did you read it and ignore it?

Posted by: Terry Gain

Yeah, I read it.

Why don't you read it again a little more carefully and try to figure out what he said.

"If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."

Obama did just that. Including the 527's, and McSame and him did not come to an agreement.

[SacTownMan]

Harpo,

Your ability to pick and choose is topped by only the Lame one.

On his questionaire Barry also said;

"My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return
excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general
election."

Let's try some intellectial honesty for a change here.

What part of "stay within the public financing system for the general election" don't you understand.

It is written in English, has proper grammer and punctuation and yet you can quote line and verse from his bullshit response.

You know that's where he tries to explain to the American people that it's those evil 527's that are coming to get them (along with those racist Republicans) and he needs to "fix the system".

His real motivation is a simple dose of good old fashioned political expediency.

Tell em what they want to hear cause they're too stupid to remember the other stuff I said, now that's change we can "Believe In".

[TRUECRISTIAN]

Democraps know that the best and fastest way to destroy America's Freedom is to work from within the system. And LIBERAL DEMONCRAP LEFT-WING EXTREMIST activist judges are their best and longest lasting assault on YOUR Freedom. These judicial insects believe, as AlGore said, that "the Constitution is a living document". We, your nearest and dearest colleagues, stand here today under the
impact of the most extraordinary and overwhelming votes of support
ever accorded by a nation to its leader. Through the genius of your leadership
and through the ideals you recreated before us, you have succeeded
in just 6YEARSin creating from a nation torn by internal strife and
bereft of hope, one united AMERICA with hope and faith in the future.
Nations yet to come will look back upon his history as to some grand
and supernatural romance. The fiery energy of his youthful career, and
the magnificent progress of his irresistible ambition, have invested his
character with the mysterious grandeur of some heavenly appearance; and
when all the lesser tumults and lesser men of our age shall have passed
away into the darkness of oblivion, history will still inscribe one
mighty era with the majestic name oF GW BUSH

[jharp]

Sac,

"My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election."

I read it and understood it and I don't think you do.

And yes this was "part" of Obama's plan. However, Obama and McCain did not come to an agreement on the deal as a whole so why would Obama give up his huge advantage.

He made the right choice and there wasn't anything dishonest about it.

[seekeronos]

I don't see why Obama would carp about GOP 527's though. It isn't as if George Soros and his billionaire buddies who run Google and YouTube and Yahoo! and so-forth aren't pumping hundreds of millions of dollars though liberal 527's like ActBlue and MoveOn.org ...

[Worst President Ever]

Some facts Seek, since you seemed to have missed them.

MoveOn closed their 527. Obama's requested that 527's not spend money on his behalf.

YouTube is an open, public forum for posting videos. You, me, or any of McCain supporters are free to post their videos just as Obama supporters do. Same goes for Google Video and YoutTube video. And no, George Soros doesn't own or control them. Google and Yahoo are public traded companies.

[seekeronos]

"--- And no, George Soros doesn't own or control them. Google and Yahoo are public traded companies. ---"

No, but Soros's billionaire buddies like Sergey Brin and that other fellow who run Google (and by extension, Youtube) as well as Yahoo!.

Add to that that these search engines market themselves primary to the left, I'd say that there is a definite lefty bias to them as adjuncts to the MSM.

As for Obama requesting that 527s don't spend money on him, that is no guarantee that some folks won't do so anyway.

[Worst President Ever]

Neither YouTube or Yahoo has any political censorship on their sites - they treat conservatives and liberals the same.

[Worst President Ever]

"Add to that that these search engines market themselves primary to the left"

Wrong - they're marketed to businesses.

[seekeronos]

"--- Neither YouTube or Yahoo has any political censorship on their sites - they treat conservatives and liberals the same. ---"

Oh, please. The blatant favouring of left-wing sites vs. right wing sites found on Google and relentless removal of politically right-wing video content is appalling.

[Worst President Ever]

No, you're wrong. Google hasn't built into their search algorithm a preference for liberal sites. There are multiple sites and services on the internet that explain exactly how Google search works and how to get to the top of the results.

Just because sites / pages aren't ranked in the order you think they should be doesn't mean there's some grand conspiracy.

Same goes for YouTube.

Again, they're public companies, not controlled by George Soros. The ultimate goal of the company is good old capitalism - make money for their investors. If YouTube were truly in the pocket of liberals, it would have immediately deleted the Jeremiah Wright video.

[seekeronos]

"--- Again, they're public companies, not controlled by George Soros. The ultimate goal of the company is good old capitalism - make money for their investors. If YouTube were truly in the pocket of liberals, it would have immediately deleted the Jeremiah Wright video. ---"

(WPE)

I never said that they were controlled by Soros, but the owners - or should I say, those who run the operations, are ideologically in bed with him.

I am not going to debate this point any further. The leftist censorship is happening:

http://kudlowsmoneypolitics.blogspot.com/2006/05/beware-of-google.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/2006/05/is_leftleaning_google_censorin.html

www.americanthinker.com/2006/10/youtube_google_and_the_liberal.html

www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/may/05050402.html

[Worst President Ever]

Yeah, I'm sure Google occasionally makes a mistake and bans a site that shouldn't be - that end of the process is probably handled by humans, not an algorithm. But there's no political bias in their search algorithm. As for the articles you linked to it, all the sites mentioned as banned show up on Google:

New Media Report

http://www.google.com/search?q=New+Media+Journal&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Mich News

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=Ilp&q=michnews&btnG=Search

Jawa Report

http://www.google.com/search?q=jawa+report&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

[seekeronos]

Those sites WPE, talk about the censorship issue. I was not trying to say that they were banned.

[Worst President Ever]

Actually, Kudlow is mainly pissed because Google supports Net Neutrality. Not a particularly consistent position if you're against censorship / gatekeepers on the Internet.

As for the other article, it uses the three sites I linked to as examples of Google censorship. Since they're all show up in Google searches, that argument also doesn't make much sense.

[veblenschild]

jimmy karter aka worst... I don't think net neutrality means what you think it means.