March 19, 2008
Hey, guys? If the last 20 years count for anything, the best estimates of his fundamental beliefs are that the United States is a racist hegemon begging to have jets flown into office towers to teach it a thing or two about imperialism. Hes a gutless, opportunistic coward who was afraid to say an unkind word to one of the power brokers in the black community on whom he counted for votes as an Illinois politician, and now that hes a national figure hes throwing the same guy under the bus to preserve the illusion that hes a post-racial politician. And youre sitting there cheering him on because you dont care what sort of idiocy or anti-American vitriol you have to swallow to put a Democrat back into the White House. Does that about sum it up? Have I missed any nuance in the U.S. government created the AIDS virus rant that Obama never, ever heard anything about and that youre now willing to wave away?
Obviously, the question was rhetorical, but the answer is definitely yes. I saw Lanny Davis on H&C the other day. When questioned about the intra-party fighting, Lanny stated something like the following:
We're all united as Democrats by a common set of beliefs. Regardless of who the nominee is, we'll all get behind him or her this fall.
Does anyone honestly believe that Democrats will not vote for HillObama, irrespective of who their favorite candidate is? While many conservatives cannot bring themselves to vote for Maverick™ due to our belief that a McCain presidency would do irreparable harm to GOP and the right in general, most Democrats are not-these days- motivated by any ideals. It's all about the pursuit of power for power's sake, which is why I still haven't written Hillary off. The Clintons exemplify the do anything, naked lust for power wing of the Democrats. And if Hillary, as I expect, pounds Obama into a frigging pulp in PA, she's likely to have overtaken him in actual votes cast, which will strengthen her position with regards to the superdelegates.
As much as I enjoy the political infighting amongst team donkey, if doesn't really matter. The winner will grind McCain into a pulp come November.
Obama, and his liberal media spirit squad, speak of having an "open, honest" dialog on race and racial resentments, hatreds, and paranoias. But Obama has had twenty years to have an open dialog -- but a private one, which is far easier -- with his "friend" Rev. Wright.
Did he have this dialog? He says he disagrees strongly with some of Wright's "controversial political positions." Did he, you know, actually raise these points with Wright?
If he did, his putative skills at "reconciliation" and "healing" seem woefully deficient. This bastard has gone on spreading his noxious racism and hatred of America until his retirement... and then beyond a bit. Obama's going to heal the racial "wounds" of 300 million but he can't get through to his very good "friend"? He can't even get him to tone down his hateful rhetoric, even if he continues to give hatred a safe harbor in his heart?
My idea of a truly groundbreaking speech would involve a Cosbyesque riff on some of the real causes of white resentment, starting first and foremost with rampant black criminality and anti-social behavior, and blacks' acceptance of this as not only acceptable but justified -- perhaps even obligatory -- given past and current racial discrimination.
He did not touch on this. He's still pandering to Wright's flock. And it's not just pandering of course; he is required to excuse the black racist, not just out of ideological fervor, but out of personal circumstantial necessity. After all, he was caught in bed with a black racist and anti-American radical, not a white racist. So of course he demands that we "understand" and "forgive" the black racist. He needs us to. His personal fortunes depend on that.
But imagine if he were white and had been caught in a 20 year cynical political alliance with a white racist -- would his calls for "forgiveness" and "understanding," and his maudlin Checkers-style "I cannot renounce him, he's my favorite dog" self-justification carry any weight whatsoever with liberals, the media, or good-hearted conservatives?
Well, it's funny in an unconventional way. And I suppose his use of the word "spirit" could be considered part of the fantasy wargaming genre. But no pictures of hookers. Sigh. Guess I'll have to check in later.
89 queries taking 0.1473 seconds, 231 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.