Skip to comments.Obama's lowball attacks
Posted on 09/28/2008 5:29:14 AM PDT by Kid Shelleen
What exactly is the change we're supposed to believe in this election year? That Barack Obama represents a new kind of politics? Or is change tied to hope, as in we hope he re-morphs from typical negative-ad-slinging pol back to magical new Obamassiah once he's safely elected president?
Does Obama even know?
In his ad "Plan for Change," Obama decries the "petty attacks and distractions" of the campaign. "Bitter partisan fights" won't solve our problems, he says. What will?
"A new spirit of unity and shared responsibility."
That ad is in English.
In Spanish, he has a very different message, one much closer to sleazy race-baiting than the spirit of la unidad.
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
hope Smerconish can get off his Obama crush long enough to acknowledge this piece. Last is usually conservative but how about Ferris?
Obaaahhhmmaa. Bolshevick in chief.
The stifling of free speech by his campaign commissars in MO is trivial compared to what we will see once he socializes medicine and controls the military and FBI. He will be America's Robert Mugabe. Although Mugabe was a known Marxist, he talked like a responsible agent of racial reconciliation in order to get the Rhodesian govt. to hand over power to him.
One of the few bright spots in the Inky.
How do you add all those names to a reply? Do you have to copy each one or is there a way to make your own personal ping/distribution list?
It is common for liberals to decry any opposition to their ideas. After all, these are the intelligensia of our nation, annointed to lead the ignorant masses to the promised land of gov’t milk and honey.
The opposition must be crushed on grounds other than debating the issues because everyone who has an iota of intellect knows that liberals are always right.....at least that is what the intellectuals tell them during their parties and meetings.
Obama is no different. He carries himself as if the White House is his right, not his privilege. We all know this by his chair with the word “President” emblazoned on the back and the briefly flaunted seal of the office of Obama.
A very good essay, except that it did not go far enough. This ploy by Obama is not a one-time act of desperation. It is his way, and the way of other leftist, black-nationalists. They feed on discontent and stir resentments, whether from imagined slights, or by hypersensitivity (such as Obama’s own complaints against his “typically white” grandmother, or against his white friends), or by dredging up recollections of slavery days (which is ancient history by now).
These politicians are manufacturing division while mouthing sanctimonious words of unity.
We may wake up some morning and the country will be Socialist. That is what Change will be! A country full of liberals with Socialism.
Why is that a stupid move? I think it's creative and funny. As I'm sure many others do. And many others would not find it to be a positive or negative event. But a stupid move? Only by those supremely in the tank for the Obamessiah.
Some save their list to their profile page. I just save it to a text file, open it in a text editor and copy and paste to the recipient line.
Your nightmare scenario might just come true if enough good people sit out this election. I suspect it may take a while to reach fruition but the Democratic Party has shown itself to be anything but democratic. Over many decades it has shown that it views America as a class system where the poor are victims, the middle class is stupid and the wealthy are evil (unless, of course, said class members are Democratic Party members). As a result, it has been working—always in the name of “the children”, “the poor” or “working families”—to take more and more traditional personal autonomy from individuals and place them in the government through restrictive laws. They have a preference for removing personal freedoms through federal laws but, if need be, state and local laws will do just fine. Government do-gooders now control our births, our deaths, our meals, our vehicle of choice, our job choices, our housing choices, the use of our own property, our recreation, our education, our home heating and more. They are in the process of asserting control over our worship, our fat intake, our rearing of our children, our words and thoughts, and more, much more. We can scarcely breathe without some government authority telling us how to do it properly.
So while an Obama administration might very well include a Nazi-like descent into totalitarianism, it doesn’t have that far to fall, thanks to the Democratic Party and its willing accomplices in the Republican Party and the judiciary.
A friend, who for some reason has lost her mind this year and is voting Nobama, commented that although the rag normally leans left, that it leaned right with that article.
I said you mean it posted the truth so you think that is leaning right?
You can always start one :-)
LOL. Didn't you know that anyone who refuses to lie about conservatives is a radical right-winger?
I will admit I was stunned.
A Really good article. Surprising coming from and Inquirer columnist.
Smerconish isn’t a conservative. He pretended to be for a while to get his career started, but now even he admits he isn’t one. With his ties to Liberals like Spector and others, I was always suspious. Now he is quite out in the open about it. And he’s one of the biggest opportunists, with one of the biggest egos, there is.
I said you mean it posted the truth so you think that is leaning right?"
Conservatives, who are so accustomed to being lied about, sometimes make the same mistake. : )
I think he’s at about the 40% line myself, I mean a little more likely to side with conservatives. But I think he’s got a crush on Obama and love is blind.
I’ve been saying it for years, long before Obama. Smerconish, who once bragged on his talk radio show about having an after dinner cigar with Castro while on a trip there with Arlen Specter, and who supported Michael Schiavo and is pro-choice, is no conservative.
not defending him, but elements giving him some conservative cred, pro-military, war on terror vs. police work (I know that makes him no more conservative than Obama), non-p/c stance on profiling, and at least some even-handedness with guests, which is more than you get out of a true leftist. Plus, doesn’t dissociate from his roots with Rizzo, to whatever degree that makes him conservative.
You can put me on it but the list has to kind of grow on its own, I think.
Furthermore, he's the most narcissistic, superficial, unintellectual, talk show host on radio. It is difficult to understand how anyone can stand listening to him. He lost me a long time ago, and yet almost every time there is a sound bite of him on 1210, throughout the day, it's all about Michael.
I don't mean to belabor the point, and no disrespect to you intended, people should understand, he's no conservative and shouldn't be mistaken for one, and that further he used conservatives and conservatism to launch his radio career.
You can put me on it also. : ) You might post to others on this thread and see if they would like to be on it, as well, which would give you a start. : )
Hi all I am going to start a ping list for news of Metro Philly/Delaware Valley area; if anybody would like to be on it just e-mail or respond to this post ...
There ya go! : ) Thanks KS!
We’re no longer there, but I still care about the area so sure, add me to the list. I’m on Trib’s list as well