Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama and the Ghost of '68
Townhall.com ^ | March 27, 2011 | Steve Chapman

Posted on 03/27/2011 6:27:41 AM PDT by Kaslin

In 2008, Democratic voters had their pick of many candidates for president -- from Hillary Clinton to John Edwards to Joe Biden. Why did they choose Barack Obama?

After all, he had less experience in office than many of his rivals. He was not as well-known. He had the potential electoral liability of being black. No one knew if he was tough enough to stand up to Republican assaults in a nasty campaign.

So what accounts for his success? More than any other reason, he won because he had opposed the invasion of Iraq -- which Clinton and others had endorsed. Obama was the peace candidate of 2008. As the long and costly war dragged on, that was a priceless asset.

Where are those voters now? The majority is probably still in Obama's camp. Most Democrats in Congress have defended the president's attack on Libya. Most have given him the benefit of the doubt in his slow withdrawal from Iraq. Most have gone along with his dramatic escalation in Afghanistan.

But the mood of Democrats may be changing. The liberal magazine The Nation decried the intervention in Libya as "flagrant hypocrisy." John Larson, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, upbraided Obama for not consulting Congress.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, called the war "another disaster." If our involvement lasts weeks or months instead of days, Obama could lose many Democratic members.

He has already lost a lot of them on Afghanistan. Recently, 85 House Democrats voted for Kucinich's resolution demanding withdrawal of U.S. forces by Dec. 31, with 99 voting no. Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, says both he and "a lot of my colleagues" in the Senate will also push for a speedy and complete departure.

(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; 2012; afghanistan; antiwar; demonrats; iraq; libya; obama

1 posted on 03/27/2011 6:27:43 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The Movement of 1968 split into factions within 4-5 years.
This is SOP for the donks.

Maybe they’ll purge zerO.


2 posted on 03/27/2011 6:32:07 AM PDT by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
So what accounts for his success? More than any other reason, he won because he had opposed the invasion of Iraq

He won because he's black, It's that simple.

3 posted on 03/27/2011 6:35:21 AM PDT by Graybeard58 (Of course Obama loves his country. The thing is, Sarah loves mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Shhhhhh, you’re not allowed to say that. The author called being black a “potential electoral liability.” Either the author is being disingenuous, or he’s extremely isolated from reality: even Slow Joe Biden knew better.


4 posted on 03/27/2011 6:38:20 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Nadie me ama como Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

I believe he is the first and last Affirmative Action President.

Name any white candidate with a resume’ as razor thin as Obama who could beat Hillary.


5 posted on 03/27/2011 6:44:39 AM PDT by Mikey_1962 (Obama: The Affirmative Action President. He's shovel ready!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
He had the potential electoral liability of being black.

No. Being black was a BIG help for Obama.

6 posted on 03/27/2011 6:49:01 AM PDT by libertylover (The problem with Obama is not that his skin is too black, it's that his ideas are too RED.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertylover

>>No. Being black was a BIG help for Obama. <<

Yep. Here is the breakdown:

Blacks: “We finally overcame.”
Latinos: “He ain’t White”
White liberals: “He ain’t White and probably isn’t American”
White “moderates”: “LOOK HERE! I am broad-minded!”

The only people left were Conservatives, who said:
“He ain’t done squat.” And we were right.


7 posted on 03/27/2011 7:10:37 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats. /P. J. O'Rourke, 1991)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“No one knew if he was tough enough to stand up to Republican assaults in a nasty campaign. “

Republican assaults?

Huh ?!?

Recognizing the lack thereof will resolve the question as to why such a predictable national disaster was not avoided.

Don’t play nice with the devil.


8 posted on 03/27/2011 7:11:58 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Excellent summary. Have a Guinness.


9 posted on 03/27/2011 7:16:08 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Nadie me ama como Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

That’s it...in a nutshell.


10 posted on 03/27/2011 7:18:23 AM PDT by lonestar (It takes a village of idiots to elect a village idiot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
All the legislation that came to Czar B.O.'s desk was approved by the DEMOCRAPS in Congress and represents the essence of the DEMOCRAP PARTY! B.O. did NOT vote on any of it. He was annointed by the DEMOCRAP PARTY to tbe the negro spokesman for them so that they could brand any objectors as RACISTS!

B.O. had no experience, no credentials, no knowledge of managment and each day we are presented with more data points to prove that statement!
11 posted on 03/27/2011 7:22:03 AM PDT by leprechaun9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
Have a Guinness.

Thanks! Bottoms up!


12 posted on 03/27/2011 7:29:26 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats. /P. J. O'Rourke, 1991)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

What people are missing here is that he had the press in his corner. Reporters were bringing their children to hear him speak - do you think they would cover him in an adversarial manner? Absolutely not.

The leftist press is still very dominant, some could say that Fox News, talk radio and the internet hardly laid a glove on it. They did not cover Obama with the scrutiny a presidential candidate deserves because they wanted him to win. Obama was basically a radical lawyer, advising ACORN, protesting against racist banks, hanging out with Farrakhan, Wright and Ayers and then got into the IL state senate to most likely remain there for the rest of his days. He has been more shocked by his success than anyone else and his break came by getting into the US Senate.

He got into the Senate with a little trickery and his pact with the devil that the press is loathe to discuss. Jack Ryan, his very formidable opponent, would have won but for an ugly divorce that was to remain sealed and yet it was not. It had a sex scandal that somehow got introduced into the public domain while both parents told the judge it would hurt their son, (which he ignored since Ryan was in politics). Obama had been emailing and campaigning to get it into the open, which he succeeded, as he brought politics to a lower level. Ryan quit the race and Obama waltzed into the Senate by slinging mud. Then he condemns mudslingers in the presidential race and the press doesn’t call him on the hypocrisy.

If the press doesn’t attack you, like they did to Bush and Palin on a daily basis, the political walk is far easier. If they are in your corner – they will make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. There was never a negative press report on Obama unless it came from the right, and too big then he and his press minions had to respond as in the Reverend Wright situation. Frankly the press in the primary race began to call Hillary a racist for her campaign against Obama - which is how much they were going to bat for Obama.

Now he has gotten us into the midst of a civil war, started bombing an Arab country and didn’t think it necessary to go before Congress. I have seen some hypocrisy in my day but this is a new low - and the press is again championing him. Complete and utter hypocrisy from a media that does nothing but kiss his backside in a blatant and embarrassing way.


13 posted on 03/27/2011 7:58:51 AM PDT by Titus-Maximus (Light from Light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
"He won because he's black, It's that simple. "

Our very own multicultural affirmative action president.

14 posted on 03/27/2011 8:09:02 AM PDT by matthew fuller ( A feast is made for laughter, and wine maketh glad the life; and money answereth all things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Silly article - no need to stretch the truth to mae the point.

Obama won because he is black. >25% of Dem voters are black - he starts with half the votes he needs to win Even a split of the rest is a landslide.


15 posted on 03/27/2011 8:11:32 AM PDT by Eldon Tyrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

16 posted on 03/27/2011 8:16:05 AM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I think this editorial makes a great point.

I know a couple of late twenty-somethings who voted for BO because they were concerned that McCain was a warmonger just like Bush. The war in Iraq was a huge deal to them.

And neither of these people are dyed-in-the-wool liberals. They are both pretty conservative in other areas but they voted for The One mostly because of the war.

In 2012, BO will maintain the minority vote, but he will lose most of the remaining coalition that elected him. The fact that states like Iowa went for BO in 2008 but sure as shootin’ won’t go for him in 2012 has to have the Dems shaking in their boots.


17 posted on 03/27/2011 8:27:04 AM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Bump


18 posted on 03/27/2011 8:43:55 AM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Yeah that’s the left’s logic if you didn’t vote for the arrogant pos. Never ming that you wouldn’t vote for a rat regardless of his or her skin color


19 posted on 03/27/2011 8:58:16 AM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Yeah that’s the left’s logic if you didn’t vote for the arrogant pos. Never mind that you wouldn’t vote for a rat regardless of his or her skin color


20 posted on 03/27/2011 8:58:43 AM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: webstersII

I hope you are asking them now who the warmonger is


21 posted on 03/27/2011 9:00:42 AM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

He won because the media picked him and ignored his background. He won Iowa before his connection to the Church of the Coo-coo’s was made public (courtesy of the drive-bys.)


22 posted on 03/27/2011 9:17:06 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Go Hawks !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“I hope you are asking them now who the warmonger is”

No need.

They are already disgusted with him.


23 posted on 03/27/2011 2:09:13 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
How many of those factors won't be at place in 2012?

Owing to that breakdown, I think it's highly likely he'll be president until Fri, Jan 20, 2017, no matter his record.

24 posted on 03/27/2011 2:37:12 PM PDT by newzjunkey (Let me be clear, Mr President: the UN is not the US Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; Delacon; ...

Thanks Kaslin.
Obama was the peace candidate of 2008. As the long and costly war dragged on, that was a priceless asset. Where are those voters now? The majority is probably still in Obama's camp. Most Democrats in Congress have defended the president's attack on Libya. Most have given him the benefit of the doubt in his slow withdrawal from Iraq. Most have gone along with his dramatic escalation in Afghanistan.
Where is Pelosi? That bitch was claiming to be all about cutting funding for the WOT, and has delivered bupkis. Same goes for Reid. How did the voters respond? By giving the Party of Treason even more seats in 2008. Only one house flipped in 2010. And alas, Zero will be reelected in 2012.

This op-ed is more lullaby from a leftwing media shill.

Snicker of the day -- "never take a knife to a gunfight" Obama was the peace candidate?!?


25 posted on 03/27/2011 6:44:08 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Thanks Cincinna for this link -- http://www.friendsofitamar.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

26 posted on 03/27/2011 6:46:51 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Thanks Cincinna for this link -- http://www.friendsofitamar.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; Delacon; ...

Democratic Debacle (1964 convention, repercussions today)
America Heritage | July 2004 (cover date) | Joshua Zeitz
Posted on 07/27/2004 9:59:49 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1179981/posts


27 posted on 03/27/2011 6:51:04 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Thanks Cincinna for this link -- http://www.friendsofitamar.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; freedumb2003
Here, have *two* Guinnesses, freedumb2003.

I gave up beer and chocolate for Lent.

(tax-chick, you have good taste. But your family all knew that already.)

g_w

28 posted on 03/28/2011 8:29:00 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Whenever I hear that the reason people only dislike Obama is because of race, I ask them if they voted for Carter or Reagan.

It usually takes a couple of tries, but eventually they get the point.

Cheers!

29 posted on 03/28/2011 8:32:20 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

I think two Guinnesses would be excessively filling.


30 posted on 03/29/2011 5:19:14 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Nadie me ama como Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson