About Me

Name: TommyO
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

How Come I am not As Smart As Thomas Sowell

This needs to read in full.


owell: Obama Win Would Be Historic Tragedy



Some elections are routine, some are important, and some are historic. If Sen. John McCain wins this election, it probably will go down in history as routine. But if Sen. Barack Obama wins, it is more likely to be historic — and catastrophic.

Once the election is over, the glittering generalities of rhetoric and style will mean nothing. Everything will depend on performance in facing huge challenges, domestic and foreign.

Performance is where Obama has nothing to show for his political career, either in Illinois or in Washington.

Policies he proposes under the change banner are almost all policies that have been tried repeatedly in other countries — and failed repeatedly in other countries.

Politicians telling businesses how to operate? That's been tried in countries around the world, especially during the second half of the 20th century. It has failed so often and so badly that even socialist and communist governments were freeing up their markets by the end of the century.

The economies of China and India began to take off into high rates of growth when they got rid of precisely the kinds of policies that Obama is advocating for the United States under the magic mantra of change.

Putting restrictions on international trade in order to save jobs at home? That was tried here with the Hawley-Smoot tariff during the Great Depression.

Unemployment was 9 percent when that tariff was passed to save jobs, but unemployment went up instead of down and reached 25 percent before the decade was over.

Higher taxes to "spread the wealth around," as Obama puts it? The idea of redistributing wealth has turned into the reality of redistributing poverty, in countries where wealth has fled and a lack of incentives has stifled the production of new wealth.

Economic disasters, however, may pale by comparison with the catastrophe of Iran with nuclear weapons. Glib rhetoric about Iran’s being "a small country," as Obama called it, will be a bitter irony for Americans who will have to live in the shadow of a nuclear threat that cannot be deterred, as that of the Soviet Union could be, by the threat of a nuclear counterattack.

Suicidal fanatics cannot be deterred. If they are willing to die and we are not, then we are at their mercy — and they have no mercy. Moreover, once they get nuclear weapons, that situation cannot be reversed.

Is this the legacy we wish to leave our children and grandchildren, by voting on the basis of style and symbolism, rather than substance?

If Barack Obama thinks that such a catastrophe can be avoided by sitting down and talking with the leaders of Iran, then he is repeating a fallacy that helped bring on World War II.

In a nuclear age, one country does not have to send troops to occupy another country to conquer it. A country is conquered if another country can dictate who rules it, as the Mongols once did with Russia, and as Osama bin Laden tried to do when he threatened retaliation against places in the United States that voted for President Bush. But he didn't have nuclear weapons to back up that threat — yet.

America has never been a conquered country, so it may be very hard for most Americans even to conceive what that can mean. After France was conquered in 1940, it was reduced to turning over some of its own innocent citizens to the Nazis to kill, just because those citizens were Jewish.

Do you think our leaders wouldn't do that? Not even if the alternative was to see New York and Los Angeles go up in mushroom clouds? If I were Jewish, I wouldn't bet my life on that.

What the Middle East fanatics want is not just our resources or even our lives, but our humiliation first, in whatever sadistic ways they can think of. Their lust for humiliation has been demonstrated repeatedly in their videotaped beheadings that find such an eager market in the Middle East.

None of this can be prevented by glib talk, but only by character, courage, and decisive actions, none of which Obama has ever demonstrated.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif. 94305. To find out more about Sowell, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com. His Web site is www.tsowell.com.

© 2008 Creator's Syndicate Inc.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

William Ayers' forgotten communist manifesto: Prairie Fire

Not really hard to believe if you were around then. See Zombie.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Save For Posterity

From NRO 10/25/08.  could not be better said.


The Obama Temptation   [Mark R. Levin]

I've been thinking this for a while so I might as well air it here. I honestly never thought we'd see such a thing in our country - not yet anyway - but I sense what's occurring in this election is a recklessness and abandonment of rationality that has preceded the voluntary surrender of liberty and security in other places. I can't help but observe that even some conservatives are caught in the moment as their attempts at explaining their support for Barack Obama are unpersuasive and even illogical. And the pull appears to be rather strong. Ken Adelman, Doug Kmiec, and others, reach for the usual platitudes in explaining themselves but are utterly incoherent. Even non-conservatives with significant public policy and real world experiences, such as Colin Powell and Charles Fried, find Obama alluring but can't explain themselves in an intelligent way.

There is a cult-like atmosphere around Barack Obama, which his campaign has carefully and successfully fabricated, which concerns me. The messiah complex. Fainting audience members at rallies. Special Obama flags and an Obama presidential seal. A graphic with the portrayal of the globe and Obama's name on it, which adorns everything from Obama's plane to his street literature. Young school children singing songs praising Obama. Teenagers wearing camouflage outfits and marching in military order chanting Obama's name and the professions he is going to open to them. An Obama world tour, culminating in a speech in Berlin where Obama proclaims we are all citizens of the world. I dare say, this is ominous stuff.

Even the media are drawn to the allure that is Obama. Yes, the media are liberal. Even so, it is obvious that this election is different. The media are open and brazen in their attempts to influence the outcome of this election. I've never seen anything like it. Virtually all evidence of Obama's past influences and radicalism — from Jeremiah Wright to William Ayers — have been raised by non-traditional news sources. The media's role has been to ignore it as long as possible, then mention it if they must, and finally dismiss it and those who raise it in the first place. It's as if the media use the Obama campaign's talking points — its preposterous assertions that Obama didn't hear Wright from the pulpit railing about black liberation, whites, Jews, etc., that Obama had no idea Ayers was a domestic terrorist despite their close political, social, and working relationship, etc. — to protect Obama from legitimate and routine scrutiny. And because journalists have also become commentators, it is hard to miss their almost uniform admiration for Obama and excitement about an Obama presidency. So in the tank are the media for Obama that for months we've read news stories and opinion pieces insisting that if Obama is not elected president it will be due to white racism. And, of course, while experience is crucial in assessing Sarah Palin's qualifications for vice president, no such standard is applied to Obama's qualifications for president. (No longer is it acceptable to minimize the work of a community organizer.) Charles Gibson and Katie Couric sought to humiliate Palin. They would never and have never tried such an approach with Obama.

But beyond the elites and the media, my greatest concern is whether this election will show a majority of the voters susceptible to the appeal of a charismatic demagogue. This may seem a harsh term to some, and no doubt will to Obama supporters, but it is a perfectly appropriate characterization. Obama's entire campaign is built on class warfare and human envy. The "change" he peddles is not new. We've seen it before. It is change that diminishes individual liberty for the soft authoritarianism of socialism. It is a populist appeal that disguises government mandated wealth redistribution as tax cuts for the middle class, falsely blames capitalism for the social policies and government corruption (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) that led to the current turmoil in our financial markets, fuels contempt for commerce and trade by stigmatizing those who run successful small and large businesses, and exploits human imperfection as a justification for a massive expansion of centralized government. Obama's appeal to the middle class is an appeal to the "the proletariat," as an infamous philosopher once described it, about which a mythology has been created. Rather than pursue the American Dream, he insists that the American Dream has arbitrary limits, limits Obama would set for the rest of us — today it's $250,000 for businesses and even less for individuals. If the individual dares to succeed beyond the limits set by Obama, he is punished for he's now officially "rich." The value of his physical and intellectual labor must be confiscated in greater amounts for the good of the proletariat (the middle class). And so it is that the middle class, the birth-child of capitalism, is both celebrated and enslaved — for its own good and the greater good. The "hope" Obama represents, therefore, is not hope at all. It is the misery of his utopianism imposed on the individual.

Unlike past Democrat presidential candidates, Obama is a hardened ideologue. He's not interested in playing around the edges. He seeks "fundamental change," i.e., to remake society. And if the Democrats control Congress with super-majorities led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, he will get much of what he demands.

The question is whether enough Americans understand what's at stake in this election and, if they do, whether they care. Is the allure of a charismatic demagogue so strong that the usually sober American people are willing to risk an Obama presidency? After all, it ensnared Adelman, Kmiec, Powell, Fried, and numerous others. And while America will certainly survive, it will do so, in many respects, as a different place.

10/25 09:29 PM

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Susan the RINO

My note to Senator Collins 10/21/08:

Dear Senator Collins:

I looked, but did not see you at either Senator McCain's visit to Portland or Gov. Palin's visit to Bangor.  Are you not the campaign chair for McCain in Maine?
Judging by your condemnation of your party's candidate for president over the past weekend, and your unending rant on your 'bipartisinship' in commercial after commercial, I can only conclude that you continue to take Republican money and support, but are afraid to identify yourself as a Republican, and further believe, as was the case with Senator Cohen, your mentor, that you have the people of Maine fooled into believing you are an Independent.

How lucky you are that the people of Maine are not fooled by Tom Allen's crass liberalism, and that you will be re-elected not for your achievements, but the rejection of the Democrat philosophy.

Tom O'Reilly

Aint she a beaut?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

WONDERING



The intensity and duration of the attacks on Gov Palin and family give me pause to wonder just what the hell the dhimmis are afraid of.

The sub-plot in the msm is the poor judgement [loose cannon- feeble minded old man move - obvious flim/ flam to pull in women - failure to vet Palin] of McC who is taking it to the chin from every angle.

In trying to sort out what is really going on, I am struck by the huge, one day upswing in contributions and the apparent forgiveness [if that is the right term] of the so-called evangelicals toward her problem with the daughter.  She, in my opinion, has a lot more going for her than 'evangelicals', if I am reading the blogs correctly.

Obamar's interview with CNN where he compares his experience to her experience [only as mayor] is a poor move on his part, as he is now running against her, rather than McC.  What's up with these people?

I think that she has more support now than before the pregnancy announcement, and will ride out all the smears and negatives that the Obamar/Soros machine can dig up.  In fact, I believe she now has the sympathy vote which will increase with each new attack.

Her appearance at the RNC is critical to the solidification of her initial support.  She must project the she is not just a woman running for office, she is a conservative running for office.

The dhimmis have made a bad call here.  The race is between Obamar and McCain, and it will quickly return to that venue next week.  Biden/Palin will be a great sideshow that will fall to Palin.  Biden is in a no-win situation with the female voter.

Questions will be answered, I believe, by next week.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Verification of the Emotion Theme

A while back I harped on the emotion vs issue theme that is carrying the Obamar canidacy.  Neat article on the American spectator about the opening of the Florida campaign HQ.

Here is the interesting tidbit: "
The crowd, Hard Case notwithstanding, was mostly a friendly and approachable bunch. So before the music (if such it was) got too loud for conversation, I managed to question several people about what it was about Obama that fetched them in. Most of the answers I got were variations on the theme of, "He touched my heart." No one said a single specific thing about a single public policy, but crooned that because of Obama's charisma and manifest goodness, he would be the one to make everything right in the areas of energy, education, war and peace, and the country's economic problems. Clearly the heart rather than the cerebral cortex is the proper organ through which to reach this bunch." [italics- mine - TommyO]

All of the exposed flips, flops, lies, etc will never touch the base.  They are emotionally involved and immune to criticism of the annoited one.

Gotta get to middle America, and that is thru the economy, the economy, the economy!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Tears On The Pillow - Rebuttal

Dean Barnett has a post up on the Weekly Standard blog regarding Obamar screwups.
He is correct, but out of touch, in my opinion, with the reality of this election [as is McCain].  Here is my e-mail to Dean:

Dean:  None of this matters a farthing to the faithful.  He can do or say anything he wants on any issue as long as he dresses it up in the pink ribbon of 'change'.
Continuing to harp on Obamar screwups misses the point.
 
Recall my note to you that specified the entire operation is built on emotion, not facts, not policies, but emotion.
 
The true believers couldn't care less as they are paying no attention to you or any right side pundit, no matter how well you nail the b.....d!  They simply rely on the fawning MSM for their daily ration of the gospel according to Obamar.
 
So, the true measure of this election is how many true believers or how many lookin on without the foggy glasses.  How do you get to the latter?
 
The key to this election season is the congressional elections.  If every candidate, whether in a dhimmi safe district or not, hammered day and nite on the economy and why it tanked, and who is resposible, and make the dhimmis come to the table on this issue, problem solved.  The  main focus is on the economy.  By November, the working public [definitely not true believers] are going to be scared to death about their financial security.  Every day we hear about more plant closings [GM Ford etc], layoffs in supposedly safe environments [Citi - Chase - Brokers -Airlines], and all the businesses that service all of the above. This rolls downhill to the local car salesman, supermarket clerk, magazine staff writer, etc.
 
Dean, your magazine should be cataloging the impending disaster every day and forcing the info out to the public.  DRILL NOW is the headline.  The dhimmis have no answers, but are being allowed to float on sea of BS.
 
I am less than impressed with the righty press [with a few exemptions] efforts, It appears that you have ceded victory to the dhimmis.  The righty press seems content to congratulate themselves on the number of gaffes and/or position reversals that they can skewer Obamar with than winning the election in this most important year [see SCOTUS retirements]. 
 
I think this true of McCain also.  Every time a jerk like Clark opens his mouth, stop with the hurt feelings, go right back to the Obamar campaign pointing out that they are disguising their lack of answers on energy and the economy with senseless attacks with no basis.  Every day, all day!  By November, the working public really won't give a damn about Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan, they will want to know how they feed the kids, heat the house, and keep or find a job. The person with the answers WINS!
 
TommyO

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DRILL NOW I

TIGERHAWK CONTINUES TO MAKE SENSE IN  THIS ENTRY ON DRILLING:  READ AND SAVE!

http://tigerhawk.blogspot.com/2008/06/oil-at-margin.html

IS THE PRICE OF ENERGY THE FATAL CHINK IN THE DHIMMI ARMOR FOR NOVEMBER?  IF I AM A CANDIDATE FOR SENATE OR HOUSE, THIS IS WHERE I GO, ESPECIALLY IN THE NORTH AS WE WILL HAVE PURCHASED OUR FIRST FULL BARREL PRIOR TO ELECTION DAY.

TOMMYO



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

OBAMA IN-SECURITY

ANDY MCCARTHY HITS IT OUT OF THE PARK.

A MUST READ!

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTFhZTdmZWZlMGExNDRjOWRlZWUxYzEwNjg0MWEzZDc=&w=MA==

SCARY, NE?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

If I Don't See It, It Isn't t here, Right?

Michael Ledeen nails it down in this WSJ piece:

http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB121279291616353311.html


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Heeeee's Baaack!

Time to make the donuts, again.  Started with a note to my friend, Dean Barnett, of the Weekly Standard:


"I am returning to the fray after a temporary respite from politics.
 
Sorry to say that I have not read a word of yours and others for a long period.
 
However, aside from golf [still an 18 hdcp], I am ready to blast off on local, state and national idiots.
 
Here is my first question:  There seems to be a movement among conservatives that a McCain loss to Obama is the best thing that can happen for Republicans.  Coupled with a dhimmi congressional blowout, the country for the first time since '94 will not  have divided government, and the public will actually see what they have wrought with the dhimmi policies.  It is supposed that the ability of the dhimmis to implement, unfettered, their lefty agenda, and push it down the throats of Americans will turn the public against them, big time.  No BDS, no excuses.  You bought it, you own it.
 
The repubs in the minority will, although without help from the MSM, be able to attack Obamar and his minions, exposing them for the loons that they are, eventually leading to a revolution in the 2010 congressional elections ala Mr. Newt.
 
To some, this walk in the wilderness for two to four years will be worth the pain of a daily dose of Obama, Reid,  Pelosi, et al, for the end result will be a long period of conservative dominance.
 
What say you, Mr. Dean?
 
TommyO"

Does this theory have any legs?  I think it might equal the movement to vote for the nut from Texas as a message to Bush '41, and look what that got us ---  Bubba and Thunder Thighs!!!
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Talk About Speakin' The Truth

Go here to learn about our forthright Attorney General:

http://www2.nysun.com/article/73772


Great Stuff!!!!!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Am I Happy or Am I sad?

Go here for a new insight into global warming and the perpetrators of gloom and doom:


http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/011088.html

Really good stuff.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Suspicions Confirmed

Wow, maybe I am not a racist after all.  I wonder why the good Rev Wright would not bring this up in a Sunday Sermon.

From Gateway Pundit:

Dear Democrats-- A Letter From Lt. Colonel Frances Rice


Lincoln Heritage Institute and Something Half of Something posted this letter from Lt. Colonel Frances Rice (pictured) to the Democratic Party:

An Open Letter to the Democratic Party
By Lt. Colonel Frances Rice,U.S. Army Retired: Contributor to the LHI

"We, African American citizens of the United States, declare and assert:

Whereas in the early 1600's 20 African men and women were landed in Virginia from a Dutch ship as slaves and from that tiny seed grew the poisoned fruit of plantation slavery which shaped the course of American development,

Whereas reconciliation and healing always begin with an apology and an effort to repay those who have been wronged,

Whereas the Democratic Party has never apologized for their horrific atrocities and racist practices committed against African Americans during the past two hundred years, nor for the residual impact that those atrocities and practices and current soft bigotry of low expectations are having on us today,

Whereas the Democratic Party fought to expand slavery and, after the Civil War, established Jim Crow Laws, Black Codes and other repressive legislation that were designed to disenfranchise African Americans,

Whereas the Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party, and their primary goal was to intimidate and terrorize African American voters, Republicans who moved South to protect African Americans and any other whites who supported them,

Whereas, according to leading historians (both black and white), the horrific atrocities committed against African Americans during slavery and Reconstruction were financed, sponsored, and promoted by the Democratic Party and their Ku Klux Klan supporters,

Whereas from 1870 to 1930, in an effort to deny African Americans their civil rights and to keep African Americans from voting Republican, thousands of African Americans were shot, beaten, lynched, mutilated, and burned to death by Ku Klux Klan terrorists from the Democratic Party,

Whereas Democratic Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry Truman rejected anti-lynching laws and efforts to establish a permanent Civil Rights Commission,

Whereas the Democratic party has used racist demagoguery to deceive African Americans about the history of the Republican Party that: (a) started as the anti-slavery party in 1854, (b) fought to free African Americans from slavery, (c) designed Reconstruction, a ten-year period of unprecedented political power for African Americans, (d) passed the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution granting African Americans freedom, citizenship, and the right to vote, (e) passed the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875 granting African Americans protection from the Black Codes and prohibiting racial discrimination in public accommodations, (f) passed the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965 granting African Americans protection from the Jim Crow laws, (g) established Affirmative Action programs to help African Americans proper with Republican President Richard Nixon's 1969 Philadelphia Plan that set the first goals and timetables and his 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act that made Affirmative Action Programs the law of our nation, and (h) never sponsored or launched a program, passed laws, or engaged in practices that resulted in the death of millions of African Americans,

Whereas Brown vs. the Board of Education of Topeka (a 1954 decision by Chief Justice Earl Warren who was appointed by Republican President Dwight Eisenhower) was a landmark civil rights case that was designed to overturn the racist practices that were established by the Democratic Party,

Whereas after Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt received the vote of African Americans, he banned African American newspapers from the military shortly after taking office because he was convinced the newspapers were communists,

Whereas Democratic President John F. Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Law, opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and was later criticized by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. for ignoring civil rights issues.

Whereas Democratic President John F. Kennedy authorized the FBI (supervised by his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy) to investigate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on suspicion of being a communist,

Whereas Democratic Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, made a 14-hour filibuster speech in the Senate in June 1964 in an unsuccessful effort to block passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and was heralded in April 2004 by Democratic Senator Christopher Dodd as a senator who would have been a great leader during the Civil War,

Whereas when the 1964 Civil Rights Act came up for vote, Senator Al Gore, Sr. and the rest of the Southern Democrats voted against the bill,

Whereas in the House of Representatives only 61 percent of the Democrats voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act as compared to 80 percent of Republicans, and in the Senate only 69 percent of the Democrats voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act, compared to 82 percent of the Republicans,

Whereas Democratic President Bill Clinton sent troops to Europe to protect the citizens of Bosnia and Kosovo while allowing an estimated 800,000 black Rwandans to be massacred in Africa, vetoed the welfare reform law twice before signing it, and refused to comply with a court order to have shipping companies develop an Affirmative Action Plan,

Whereas Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore created harmful racial division when he falsely claimed that the 2000 presidential election was "stolen" from him and that African Americans in Florida were disenfranchised, even though a second recount of Florida votes by the "Miami Herald" and a consortium of major news organizations confirmed that he lost the election, and a ruling by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission declared that African Americans were not denied the right to vote,

Whereas the Democratic Party's soft bigotry of low expectations and social promotions have consigned African Americans to economic bondage and created a culture of dependency on government social programs,

Whereas the Democratic Party's use of deception and fear to block welfare reform, the faith-based initiative and school choice that would help African Americans prosper is consistent with the Democratic Party's heritage of racism that included sanctioning of slavery and kukluxery, a perversion of moral sentiment among leaders of the Democratic Party whose racist legacy bode ill until this generation of African Americans,

Now, therefore, for the above and other documented atrocities and accumulated wrongs inflicted upon African Americans, we demand a formal written apology and other appropriate remuneration from the leadership of the Democratic party.
Thanks to ytba for the link.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

VDH Does It Again!

From NRO this morning.  Why can't I write like VDH?

"Obama the Magician   [Victor Davis Hanson]

I think the speech has wowed Obama’s base, yet after its mesmerizing delivery wears off, it will perhaps raise more questions with most others.

The Obama narratives suggest a disturbing lack of responsibility, or of any notion of free will. Michelle, for example, apparently had no free will in taking out big loans to go to Harvard Law School, only pique that they must be paid back.

Barack had likewise no free will in allying himself as friend, parishioner, and confidant with an abject racist who is now evolved into a “former” pastor, and a “scholar” and “an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy” and “controversial” (apparently “not particularly controversial” is now inoperative).

Indeed, the last thing Obama wants, in fact, is an honest, painful discussion about race in America, especially how centuries of racism, but also as well as present demagogic leadership, white guilt, and ineffective and counterproductive government programs, have all factored into present endemic problems of illegitimacy, extraordinary high crime rates, and often racist narratives from the likes of Wright and Farrakhan to rap music — and yet have not precluded the amazing success and parity with the rest of America on the part of well over half of the African-American community.

Two corollaries always follow the Obama victimology: moral equivalence and the subtle suggestion that any who question his thesis of despair are themselves suspect.

So we hear of poor Barack’s grandmother’s private fears in the same breath as Wright’s public hatred. Geraldine Ferraro is understood in the same context as Reverend Wright. The Reagan Coalition and talk radio are identical to Reverend Wright — albeit without similar contexts for their own purported racism. Your own pastor, priest, or rabbi are analogous to Rev. Wright.

And then, of course, your own motives are suspect if you question any of this sophistry. For Michelle it is always “they” who raised new obstacles against this deprived Ivy League couple and their quest for the Presidency; for Barack it is those who play “snippets”, or the system of “corporate culture” that has made Wright the object of anger to similarly victimized poor white pawns.

The message? Wright’s motives for espousing hatred are complex and misunderstood; your motives for worrying about Obama and his Pastor are simple and suspect.

When Obama the magician was all done this morning, Obama was no longer under examination for terrible judgment in subsidizing a racist by his association and purse, nor was even the racist Wright under doubt; instead almost everyone else, from the system to his grandmother, to talk radio, to corporate culture, to your rabbi or priest suddenly was.

The result? This will apparently play well with a Democratic African-American audience and white elite liberals, who are already giddy and comparing the speech to Martin Luther King’s best. In this way of thinking, after all, that for the last seven years the most powerful diplomats in the world have been two African-Americans counts little (Wright, for example, slurred Sec. Rice), but that anyone would dare ask a presidential candidate to dissociate himself from a racist counts a lot.

Yet in the general election, millions will still remember how Obama’s pastor and confidant Reverend Wright cursed their culture and their country, and they will still remain confused about his relationship with and influence upon their would-be next President—and in the end they will be very much angered by all that indeed."

03/19 07:41 AM



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456789Next »