The Most Divisive Campaign in American History

Sultan Knish ^ | Saturday, August 11, 2012 Saturday, August 11, 2012 | Daniel Greenfield

[Dysart]

Just superb. Obama's stealthy takeover is dissected in this article piercing right through his phony, lofty pretenses, and laying bare his transformation-by-destruction hope and change pact with his chosen ones. You know, the usual suspects.

20 replies over five days? Embarrassing. And pretty much says it all.

[expat1000]

This analysis by Greenfield was also posted by someone else in another thread, and this was a comment I wrote there about the lack of comments (I think there were only 9):

I was a bit surprised myself, but not overly, because like Weston says, there is really nothing else to be said.

I’ve been through this with other Sultan Knish articles where I and others would like to say something but after a while you just run out of superlatives. Some of these analyses - they are so good, so complete that there is no comment that adds anything to them. Then add to that there are so many of this caliber.. that is what puts Greenfield in a class by himself, IMO.

[thecodont]

Very, very good summary.

[Dysart]

I understand what you're saying about the lack of discussion. Though it'd be nice to know if it was being being read or ignored because of the length or just what...we used to have a view count feature here, but it vanished. Besides I can always think of something to offer up on a worthy item; even it's a witty retort as last resort. Unfortunately there's nothing funny about all this.

But Greenfield's a great writer/analyst judging by this sample. I bookmarked Sultan Knish..thanks for posting and the introduction.

[Praxeologue]

This is an excellent article.

Beyond its value in coalescing my understanding of the issues and enlightening me with new perception, I wrestle with what value the article could have to the independent voter. I fear that they would dismiss it, since it is based upon many premises that only movement conservatives understand and accept. Taking Greenfield's piece as a starting point, our task is to address every misconception and assumption that is being used by the Democrats to mislead each interest group. For example, the need for competition to reduce health care costs. This piece helps solidify our philosophic understanding as we make the 'micro' arguments. By that I mean a high level view of what is going on, for which Greenfield is helpful.

[expat1000]

I understand what you're saying about the lack of discussion. Though it'd be nice to know if it was being being read or ignored because of the length or just what...we used to have a view count feature here, but it vanished.

Hi Dysart,

One thing I can tell you is the ping list has 40+ members which to me sounds like a lot and I know a lot of FReepers don't like to be pinged but are regular readers, and others visit the Sultan Knish site regularly or on the mailing list there.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Dysart.

[expat1000]

>>20 replies over five days?

Curiously, a repost of this article here http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2918259/posts received twice that.