RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Hey Obama. What Flavor is the Kool Aid?

You know where I stand.  I believe with every fiber of my being that Barack Obama is not qualified to be President.  Two undistinguished years as a Senator and being a “nice” guy in the Illinois state legislature are laughable, yet this guy is getting serious attention.  I’m just waiting for Obama to decide to take his followers to Guyana.  He reminds me of Jim Jones, the famous San Francisco preacher who led his congregation to their deaths in the jungles of Guyana.

“Oh, Larry,” you say, have you gone over the edge?  Well, take a look at this and tell me what you think:

I’ve been blessed to hear many great orations. I was in the audience when Howard Dean gave his famous address challenging the Democratic Party to rediscover courage and return to principle. I have heard Bill Clinton speak of a place called Hope, and listened to John Edwards bravely channel the populism that American politics so often suppresses. Some of those politicians mirrored my beliefs better than Obama does. Some of their speeches were more declarative and immediate in their passion. But none achieve quite what Obama, at his best, creates.

Obama’s finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don’t even really inspire. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment, as if history has stopped flowing passively by, and, just for an instant, contracted around you, made you aware of its presence, and your role in it. He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh, over color, over despair. The other great leaders I’ve heard guide us towards a better politics, but Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our highest selves, to the place where America exists as a glittering ideal, and where we, its honored inhabitants, seem capable of achieving it, and thus of sharing in its meaning and transcendence.

That friends, is the well-respected Ezra Klein.  Jesus Fucking Christ!!!  “Triumph of word over flesh?”  Great, we now have the black Jesus.  When do we get the sermon on the mount (blessed are the peacemakers. . .) and I wonder what kind of loaves and fishes he’ll be serving?

Unfortunately, this kind of adoration is all too common.  Seemingly sane, common sense folks are going weak in the knees, and likening Obama to the reincarnation of John and Bobby Kennedy combined.  But this honeymoon will end.  Democrats can only hope the realities of Obama’s true record and personality are exposed before the primary season ends.  Otherwise, you can count on the Republicans retaining the White House.  Jim Jones’ kool-aid killed his followers.  The Barack Obama version will kill the Democrats if folks keep chugging this stuff down.

  • Pingback: Larry Johnson is a liar, period. « The ANTI-PUMA

    • WildChild

      Those are perhaps the most well defended sets of three periods in history.

  • Pingback: Ironic comment of the day « Mad Wombat

  • Mikey

    “Out of nowhere, a complete unknown.”
    –Karl Spackler– in Caddy Shack.

    Much of my analysis is based on (Short Version) studying propaganda memes and reverse engineering Propaganda and Psychological Operations techniques 10 to 16 hrs a day for the last 15 years. (Short Version)

    Yes, Obama really came out of nowhere and as the buzz developed on this highly unqualified “Nobody”, it gave me a chill as though I could sense something huge, powerful and malevolent behind him. I had him pegged as a deep implant establishment mole early on and now I am starting to smell a Rovian stench about him. Remember Rove’s double top-secret new project when he “left” the Bush Mob.

    The Ol’ Boys in Old south used to have a backhanded complementary term for their preferred type of black person; “Good Nigger”.Obama fits the term to a T. Yup, Clarance Thomas all over again!

    If he showed up in my organization, I would have counter intelligence shoved so far up his ass that when he opened his mouth his voice would be that of the ghost of James Jesus Angleton.

    This SOB is dangerous.

    Ever So Sincerely,
    Michael D. Adams
    NPC Intelligence Associates

  • justsomeone

    Speaking of shining cities on a hill, did you catch Bill Clinton speaking to a crowd of university students this past week say, “America is NOT a place it’s an IDEA.” That’s kinda what Junior thinks too. I want a Pres who knows it’s a place. I’ve had enough napolionic pax americana to last a life time.

  • ybnormal

    I don’t buy the pied piper thing.
    At least the Pied Piper of Hamelin started with performing a useful function by getting rid of the rats. He only led the children away when the mayor refused to pay.

    Obama does have something in common with Reagan, which is a knack for persuading in a public speaking venue. Also like Reagan, he does not himself have any real ability to accomplish things. That, like Reagan, is left to subordinates. The question then is, like with Reagan, what are the goals of those subordinates who are doing the real work? And who’s going to keep them on track in the interest of the country? Certainly not Reagan or Obama.

    Obama supporters are likely to counter this current Reaganesque criticism, by saying that they want a progressive version of Reagan, but without the policies of Reagan’s subordinates.

    But Reagan, due to his in-expertise, allowed people even he himself didn’t like, to run policy. The name Oliver North comes to mind.

    Also, both Reagan and George W. Bush believed that policy direction was made with their own mind; when in fact it was made based on filtered and manipulated information from their subordinates, who were actually in a de facto sense, Reagan’s and W. Bush’s masters. (i.e. one of Cheney’s skills is the ability to keep his boss’s desk clear)

    The real danger with Obama, like with Reagan and also W. Bush, is that you don’t just get him, you get the whole package. In hindsight we know what we got in the Reagan and W. Bush packages. What crystal ball is there to tell us what’s in the Obama package?

    While we’re at it, let’s apply the same question to all the candidates.

    • Smilin’ Jim

      What crystal ball is there to tell us what’s in the Obama package?

      The answers lie in finding the party that is using the lad as a useful idiot.

      • Fred C. Dobbs

        Bingo!

        • TeakWoodKite

          The the one missing from Texas?
          “And he held it to the light…Look here brother , who you jivin’ with that cosmic debris?” Frank Zappa

  • tw

    The glittering American ideal was 5 slaves = 3 whites, and the removal ( to be polite) of the indigenous population. Why does a significant portion of America need to see itself as better, more gifted or morally elevated than the rest of the world? That childish self-image is precisely one of our biggest problems and a major impediment to getting down to the hard work, the drudgery that real change requires. Why bother with better politics when glittering magic is available; when we can aspire to a fairy-tale America that never existed? Such waste.

    • Fred C. Dobbs

      >>> Why does a significant portion of America need to see itself as better, more gifted or morally elevated than the rest of the world?

      Because it makes us feel better than the French, who bathe too rarely and smoke too much; the English, with their bad teeth and who drive on the wrong side of the road; and the Germans, who can’t help invading Poland and annexing Alsace and Lorraine periodically.

      Also, it sure sells tickets to Rambo movies and keeps The Duke on in re-runs, doesn’t it?

      Well, except for The Searchers, where The Duke plays a REAL deluded, compulsive racist murderer.

      >>> Why bother with better politics when glittering magic is available; when we can aspire to a fairy-tale America that never existed?

      Because Saint Ronnie (aka, The Addled Puppet Reagan) told us about The Shining City on a Hill.

      Why waste our Beautiful Minds on ugly, poor, sick people, social inequity and crappy air and water when we can imagine ourselves the Smartest Sumbitches on the Planet…and, Hey! We have the Movies to back it up!

      So, get your Jingo on, or be square! What, are you an Osama-lover?

      U-S-A is Num-ber 1! U-S-A is Num-ber 1!

      • Cee

        Why waste our Beautiful Minds on ugly, poor, sick people, social inequity

        If you are going to caucus in Nevada today, please take a good look at Hillary Clinton’s chief strategist Mark Penn and his wife.

        Mark J. Penn is worldwide CEO of the PR firm Burson-Marsteller (B-M), a position he has held since December 2005. [1] He is also the president of the polling firm Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates (PSB), which he co-founded in 1975.

        Penn is also U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton’s top presidential campaign strategist. A biographical note states that he “has worked with Mrs. Clinton for over six years, since he ran the polling and messaging for her successful election to the US Senate in 2000.” [2]

        In mid-2007, the dual role of Mark Penn as the CEO of the PR firm Busron-Marsteller and chief strategist for the Democratic Party’s Presidential aspirant Hilliary Clinton, irked some labor leaders. The New York Times reported that labor leaders Bruce Raynor of UniteHere, and James Hoffa of the Teamsters union, wrote to Clinton expressing their concern about B-M’s anti-labor work. “He cannot serve two masters, working for a pro-union candidate and working for anti-union companies,” Teamsters President Jim Hoffa said. [6]

        Take a look at the Third Way:

        The Third Way, according to New Democrats Online, the Democratic Leadership Council’s online community, is “a global movement dedicated to modernizing progressive politics for the information age. Third Way politics seeks a new balance of economic dynamism and social security, a new social compact based on individual rights and responsibilities, and a new model for governing that equips citizens and communities to solve their own problems.” [1]

        “The core principles and ideas of this Third Way movement are set forth in The New Progressive Declaration: A Political Philosophy for the Information Age.” [2]

        Here are their principles (with my explications in bold):

        “The Third Way philosophy seeks to adapt enduring progressive values to the new challenges of he information age. It rests on three cornerstones: [6]

        * the idea that government should promote equal opportunity for all while granting special privilege for none; [no more affirmative action]

        * an ethic of mutual responsibility that equally rejects the politics of entitlement and the politics of social abandonment; and, [no more welfare]

        * a new approach to governing that empowers citizens to act for themselves.[Bush's ownership society and the privitization of Social Security]

        “The Third Way approach to economic opportunity and security stresses technological innovation, competitive enterprise, and education rather than top- down redistribution [high margin tax rates, capital gains taxes, dividends taxes, corporate taxes] or laissez faire. On questions of values, it embraces ‘tolerant traditionalism,’ honoring traditional moral and family values while resisting attempts to impose them on others. [no gays in the military, no gay marriage] It favors an enabling rather than a bureaucratic government [ending big government as we know it], expanding choices for citizens [privitizing entitlements and services], using market means to achieve public ends [subcontracting to Blackwater and Kellogg and Root] and encouraging civic and community institutions to play a larger role in public life [charity, not hand-outs]. The Third Way works to build inclusive, multiethnic societies based on common allegiance to democratic values.” [7]

        This is the basic philosophy of Clintonism when the Clintons are not trying to court Democrats that largely believe in none of these things. These are the solutions favored by New Democrats, the Democratic Leadership Council, The New Republic, and the vast majority of the veterans of Bill Clinton’s administration. If you do not support these policies then, for the love of all that is Holy, do not caucus for Hillary Clinton.

        And I haven’t even touched on foreign policy. Bill Clinton implemented the eastward expansion of NATO and the aggressive military basing strategy in the Middle East and Central Asia that has caused all this blowback from terrorism. There is no indication that Hillary Clinton will do anything but fight tenaciously to maintain this costly and risky strategy. Yes, she will not run the government like a neo-conservative. But she will not make the changes that need to be made for the simple reason that it would repudiate one of the cornerstones of her husband’s foreign policy.

        Bushism needs to be tossed on the ash heap of history, but Clintonism needs to be rejected as well. Clintonism helped pave the way for Bushism in many ways, and in foreign policy, they both share huge amounts of blame for our current predicament. Both the Bushes and the Clintons desperately need to be rejected and repudiated. It’s absolutely vital that neither of them occupy the White House ever again.

        http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/19/3427/51766/17/439321

  • osama_been_forgotten

    If Clinton were not a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Health Insurance Industry, I’d agree with all this.

    We can sit down at the table, and talk with the leaders of North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba.

    But the time for talking with the leaders of the Health Insurance Industry is long past. They show no mercy, no common human decency, and no respect for the rules of commerce. Therefore, for the good of all humanity, and everything that we hold dear and decent – they must be destroyed.

    That means we cannot elect their AGENTS.

    We elected an AGENT of the Oil Industry president in 2000. And Oil went from $20/bbl to $100/bbl.

    (Tom DeLay has been the AGENT of the Health Care Industry – against whom, we’ve fared no better).

    Clinton’s Health Care plan is to MANDATE that we all MUST purchase private health insurance.

    Don’t you wish you had enough money to bribe a President to pass a law to MANDATE that everyone purchase YOUR product?

    While I’d much rather see Edwards elected – that’s not going to happen, because he’s got the stench of Kerry ’04 on him still. The only viable option is Obama. Clinton has already sold us all out. Her extensive “experience” consists of SELLING her constituency. So now, she just wants a larger constituency to SELL to her clients: The Health Insurance Industry.

    • Cee

      Look up people from the nuclear industry who fund Hillary.

      Hillary Clinton continues to vote in favor of Yucca Mountain’s funding which has cost the taxpayers of this nation upwards $7 Billion dollars.

      http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/4363

    • Taters

      Hmmm…the health care plan of Massachusetts or Mississippi’s.
      Hillary’s is very simlar to MA’s where it is universal and Obama’s is like Mississippi’s – where there is a high number of uninsured. Fifteenmiilion folks uninsured is not universal health care.

      • TeakWoodKite

        Taters: My sister in-laws Dad passed in Mass recently and was relieved of his earthly painful bondage. My brother comments about the difficult

        … including the Medicare application, which itself is a shameful exhibition of punative blaming of the impoverished that seems to much a part of our noble state.

        There will be much need of work, regardless of who’s “plan” gains support. Personally I agree with M Moore when he says there should be no profit in the health and well being of human beings.

        • shirin

          As someone who has numerous family members, including a child, whose profession is health care, I submit that health care professionals deserve to make very good livings in accordance with the quantity and quality of the care they provide.

          I have fortunately been very satisfied so far with the health plan I have through my employment, and find the cost to me not completely unreasonable. At the same time I recognize that not everyone is as fortunate as I have been. Decent, affordable health care should be a right of all members of a civilized society.

          • shirin

            PS I should point out that prior to the imposition of sanctions in 1990, top quality, state-of-the-art health care was a right that was granted to every Iraqi citizen. The Ba`th government instituted programs to ensure that qualified doctors were available even in remote and rural areas.

            It is true that the war with Iran over time brought significant deterioration in all government services, including medical care, but the system did not begin to break down completely until the systematic destruction of civilian infrastructure in 1991 (which included destruction of medical facilities) accompanied and followed by more than a dozen years of the most severe and comprehensive system of sanctions and import embargoes in modern history.

        • Taters

          TeakwoodKite
          I’m sorry to hear about that. You are right, TK there are difficulties when it should be so simple.
          There was a big battle here in MI when Bill Frist’s folks (HCA) came in and attempted to change the not for profit requirement of hospitals through “the back door” by attempting to buy a finacially distressed hcspital in Michigan and challenging the constitutionality of the state’s non profit mandate of hospitals. Thank God the state of Michigan won, My friend who was asst AG in charge and who tried the case said it was his proudest moment. Shortly after, HCA was found guilty of massive medicare and medicaid fraud, paying 1.7 biilion dollars in fines, the largest at the time. HCA was also the largest provider of abortions in the US – for profit.

  • justsomeone

    Fred C Dobbs, this is the 2nd time you’ve used the term “magic negro” to describe Obama. The 1st time you used it Cee asked you to expound & you didn’t, so now I’m asking, What the hell does it mean? What is a “magic negro”? Obama is mixed race, black father/white mother, is that what you’re refuring to? Maybe Tiger Woods is the only public personality who doesn’t adhere to the “one drop rule”. Let’s hear it. I’m all ears.

    • Cee

      I looked it up and posted the song that Rush Limbaugh coined. After reading the following I understand why Booty Shaker Johnson brought up Sidney Poitier.

      The magical negro (sometimes called the mystical negro, magic negro, or our Magical African-American Friend) is a stock character who appears in fiction of a variety of media. The word negro, now considered archaic and offensive, is used intentionally to claim that the archetype is a racist throwback, an update of the “Sambo” and “savage other” stereotypes.

      The magical negro is typically “in some way outwardly or inwardly disabled, either by discrimination, disability or social constraint,” often a janitor or prisoner.[5] He has no past; he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist.[6] He is the black stereotype, “prone to criminality and laziness.”[7] To counterbalance this, he has some sort of magical power, “rather vaguely defined but not the sort of thing one typically encounters.”[6] He is patient and wise, often dispensing various words of wisdom, and is “closer to the earth.”[3]

      The magical negro serves as a plot device to help the protagonist get out of trouble, typically through helping the white character recognize his own faults and overcome them.[3] In this way, the magical negro is similar to the Deus ex machina; a simple way for the protagonist to overcome an obstacle almost entirely through outside help. Although he has magical powers, his “magic is ostensibly directed toward helping and enlightening a white male character.”[5] It is this feature of the magical negro that some people find most troubling. Although the character seems to be showing African-Americans in a positive light, he is still ultimately subordinate to European-Americans. He is also regarded as an exception, allowing white America to “like individual black people but not black culture.”[8]

      To save the white protagonist, however, he would do anything, including sacrificing himself, as Sidney Poitier portrays in The Defiant Ones, the prototypical magical negro movie.[3] Note that Poitier’s character is also saved by the white protagonist.

      • Fred C. Dobbs

        Thanks, Cee. You beat me to the punch while I was trying to condense the same citation you used.

        I am not so comfortable with that term as I am with the phrase, “Belafonte/Poitier Effect,” but that seems to be a bit obscure for anyone born after 1966 or so. By then these actors/performers had joined the mainstream.

        Yes, Virginia, there WERE Black Activists in entertainment before Morgan Freeman and Halle Barry.

        “Negro,” BTW, was a word banned in the Southern household in which I grew up in the 50′s, but then, my mother was always the Town Commie anyway, being a real Democrat vesus a Dixiecrat, running the, “Trick or Treat for UNICEF,” in the fall of the year, and complaining in public about the local school system’s MANDATORY attendance policy for religious sessions in elementary school run by a different Protestant denomination than the one to which we belonged.

        Limbaugh’s use of, “Magic Negro,” makes it almost unavoidably perjorative (much more than the term “Negro,” in my opinion), and I am certain that his usage IS perjorative.

        Mine is not.

        For an illustrative example, one might care to watch the movie, “G,” once again.

        ADDENDUM: One would NEVER call it the Robeson/Armstrong Effect, would one?

      • Fred C. Dobbs

        >>> “He is also regarded as an exception, allowing white America to ‘like individual black people but not black culture.’”

        Back in kollege we called this, “Liking Soul Music, but Not Inviting Will Washington to your party.”

      • CK

        Standard genre stock type:
        The magic black man or woman
        The stoic Indian buddy
        The manic hispanic pal
        The grumbling Gabby Hayes sidekick
        The schemeing supply clerk with an ethnic last name.
        And now the waysmart Arabic/Farsi ally. The one who doesn’t deserve waterboarding but you still don’t want to be seen with him at a dinner out of the office.

  • Brighid

    Well, on various ‘progressive’ blogs, I’ve witnessed hundreds, if not thousands, of commenters and diariests attacking progressive journalists, progressive bloggers, and others just for making critical comments about, or asking critical questions about, Barack Obama. I’ve seen hundreds, if not thousands, of hypocrisies supporting Obama’s “present” votes, his lack of any Senate hearings on the Subcommittee he chaired on Europe and NATO, and his paltry Senate voting record. They’ve attacked Paul Krugman, for God’s sake. Even their idol Keith Olbermann is worried that he’s offended the ObamaBots. I’ve witnessed vitriolic attacks on former DEMOCRATIC President Bill Clinton, as if he were evil incarnate. These attacks come from people who, a year ago, would have vehemently denied they would do such a thing. I’ve witnessed racial divisiveness splitting the Democratic party, and Obama supporters claiming Hillary Clinton is a racist.

    It’s just staggering to see so-called ‘reality based’ progressives in the blogosphere turning themselves inside out, and upside down, in a ‘cult of personality’ frenzy for a candidate who claims the mantle of Ronald Reagan. Do these progressives honestly think Ronald Reagan was a great president? That’s what they are now arguing at Kos’ site!

    Wow. Who knew the progressive blogospher was gonna ‘crash the gates’ by warming to Reagan as a great president, huh?

    Staggering.

    • Cee

      What is staggering is that you think anyone listens to you when you use the term OmabaBots.
      Desperation is saying that Obama said Reagan was great when he said no such thing.
      The desperation you display is staggering, unflattering and not a winning strategy.

    • Taters

      Well said Brighid.

  • Gloria

    How does Obama feel about Reagan’s creation of the stereotypical black WELFARE QUEEN that he used over and over again?? (while, in reality, most on welfare were white).

    What really bugs me is this “generational”/”cultural” CHANGE crap that is being shoved at us. Why does this hyped-up punditry and message from Mr. Change supplant having the courage to actually discuss POLICY which affects us all?? Isn’t this rather “divisive” politics rather than being uniting???

    PS–sorry, I’m one of those “invested” in the fights of the 60-70′s.

  • Ferin

    I just think he seems to ready to pander to conservatives to try and get votes, even on some pretty straight up and down issues that he really shouldn’t compromise on.

  • Pat

    Thank you for this article. Years ago a woman I knew told me an EST experience was just fabulous. After she kept nagging, I said, “Oh, all right” and went. I stuck it out just because I paid for it, but the whole time I kept wondering why these people were so vacant that they’d buy into this modern day prophet crap. The last night I was a few minutes late (a HUGE no-no) because my niece’s car broke down and she had a college final. The thug at the door started to bully me about it and I told him to shove it, that he wasn’t talking to an effing Manson chick.

    • TeakWoodKite

      Shocking :)

    • Taters

      We used to refer to them as est holes in the Bay area. A buddy of mine went to a meeting of est in Marin county in the 70′s. He had only been back from VN for a few years and he was interested in someone (A young lady) who had dragged him there. It creeped him out and when they locked the doors and refused to let him leave, he punched his way out. I don’t think he saw her after that.

      • TeakWoodKite

        I knew a lady that went to EST and she was “snapped” mentally afterwards…she tried to get me to go…just like playin tunes on Market St. for change in the guitar case and getting invited by Moon’ys to dinner.

  • http://floricane.typepad.com John

    Before you guys became apoplectic about Obama and presidential politics, this weblog was a fascinating and important source for perspective on important policy issues.

  • Fred C. Dobbs

    Invoking the mantle of The Addled Puppet Reagan may be effective for a time, but does little to protect Obama from his own and his staff’s screw-ups. There’s not a Democrat in Nevada who considers the Las Vegas Review-Journal anything but a mullet wrapper and house organ for the casino moguls and mining bosses who run the Silver State.

    The Publisher of the R-J, about 3 months ago, ran a piece detailing the delightful lunch he had with Matt Drudge, and recommended The Drudge Report to all his readers.

    Why would Obama, or any other Democrat, even cross the threshold of this paper or the other rag in Reno?

    Gross stupidity?

    I fall back on previous statements:

    1. Obama will run out his string by 15 April or so;
    2. The Magic Negro act will wear thin;
    3. He is little more than Harry Belafonte with a J.D.

    Absent a handler of the caliber of the late Lynn Nofziger, Obama is toast. He just hasn’t, “popped up,” yet.

    I haven’t seen this many normally rational people turned to drooling idiots since the days of Bagwhan Shree Rajneesh…

    • CK

      probably the same people.

    • Cee

      Fred,

      Your girl isn’t going to win.

      • CK

        Bill Clinton is obviously playing a larger role in Hillary’s campaign.
        Imagine that Hillary wins.
        Either Bill will play a huge role in her administration, in which case the citizenry will be subjected to tedious hours of recapitulation of the clinton marriage/Monica/Bill is really the unelected president yadda yadda; or he will not play a significant role in her administration in which case the citizenry will be subjected to tedious hours of psychobabble relating to the Clinton Marriage and the structural flaws within it that have forced Hillary to cage Bill.
        Either way she handles Bill’s role in her administration, will be a no win situation for her and the American populace. Can she nominate him to the Supreme Court, to the UN Ambassadorship, to head the DOJ? Does one expect the Senate to easily advise and consent to Bill holding any high appointed office? He is not the Bill Clinton of the 90′s, he is a modestly wealthy pal of the Bushes now. ( wasn’t his first suggestion that Hillary would use he and Bush 41 to solve the world’s problems? Surely Bush 41 used Bill to give bipartisan appeal to the Boxing Day tsunami relief but that shoe will not go on the other foot. Bush 41 is not about to give Hillary bipartisan support for anything substantive. )
        If she wins, it will be all about Bill for the 4 years she serves, if she loses it will be Bill’s fault if he continues to function as he has the last two weeks.

        • Cee

          I heard the name Monica Lewinsky when I woke up this morning. I won’t be voting for Hillary and Bill.
          I’ve had enough of those cretins.

          • Kathleen

            with you. I heard David Gergen on some news program report that when the Insurance companies offered Hillary a compromise on her Health care plan back in the early 90′s she refused to negotiate. Instead of being willing to be satisfied with incremental steps her whole plan was shut out.

            The 2002 war resolution vote combined with her yes vote on the Kyl Lieberman amendment was just too much warmongering for me.

            • TeakwoodKite

              her whole plan was shut out.

              And this won’t happen to Edwards or Obama?

              • CK

                With Edwards yes unless a whole lot of currently sitting dems are replaced in this election with much more liberal dems.
                With Obama no as he will not offer anything much beyond pablum and uplifting bloviation.
                With Hillary nothing will change, it will be Bush in a female power suit until Bush 45 wins in 2012. The law of political inertia will hold. There will be no grand changes in foreign or domestic policies under Hillary or Obama or Edwards. The troops will stay in Iraq, the fleets will stay in the Gulf, the Special forces will operate in the Pakistan provinces. As soon as the subprime lending mess works its wiles, redlining will again be used as a club to force new subprime lending.

      • shirin

        So, who is, Cee? Obama? Heaven forbid! Edwards? Doesn’t look very hopeful. And in November? Which Republican are we going to end up with?

        • CK

          Ron Paul of course. The only republican who can beat any of the dems on foreign policy and domestic policy.

  • TeakWoodKite

    What is the difference?

    Kerry has not physically turned the e-mail list over to the Obama campaign. Legal reasons and the privacy policy established by the Massachusetts senator allow the list to be used by other campaigns, but not transferred into their possession, according to a Kerry aide.

    http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/obama-gains-access-to-big-dollars-through-kerrys-endorsement-2008-01-18.html

    • http://www.evergreenpolitics.com shoephone

      I don’t know what the difference is since I’ve heard from friends who were on Kerry’s list that they are now receiving emails from the Obama campaign. And they are pissed.

      • bob h

        I got my first e-mail from Barack the day after the Kerry endorsement. I was heavily invested in Kerry.

      • TeakWoodKite

        I would be as well.

  • TeakWoodKite

    What flavor does a lie taste like?
    OT:
    Not a word of criticism’ before or after destruction of waterboarding videos.

    Former CIA Director Porter Goss never criticized plans to destroy interrogation videotapes,

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22712048/

  • TeakWoodKite

    Rudy G was the home to “remove them” from the streets of NYC. I remember seeing an old women taken away after she froze too death one winter night by Union and 14th. It was right out of a Dostoevsky novel.

    The ersatz Gipper who introduced the term/adjective “homeless” into our American vocabulary

  • djork

    Amen Larry. I was on the Obama train for awhile, until I kept hearing his supporters say “he inspires me” which began to sound like the liberal version of “i’d like to have a beer with him…” I took a second look at Hillary and haven’t looked back. Obama’s vague message of “hope” and “unity” has no translation into the real world of governing, and the longer this goes on, the more painfully obvious it becomes…it simply astonishes me that intelligent people whom I respect can’t see it and have completely abandoned their critical thinking skills and gone for the cult of personality. Some of these people are as bad as the Bush cultists from a few years ago. I thought our side was smarter than that…oh well what a surprise.

    • shirin

      Maybe you ought to take a third look at Hillary, and then look beyond the Hillary/Obama duality at a third person?

      Hillary, the great humanitarian and protector of children, has Madeleine “the price (of half a million dead Iraqi children under five years old) is worth it” Albright as her foreign policy advisor. Madeleine, I have learned today has jumped on the “let’s divide Iraq into three parts, against the will of 98% of its citizens” bandwagon (why is that not surprising?), which means that it is almost certain to be Hillary’s policy. After all, what is ignoring the will of all but a tiny percentage of Iraqis, breaking up a few million Iraqi families, and displacing a few millions more Iraqis, who have lived together with normal relations for centuries, when it comes to doing what the empress and her court have decided?

      I also have a report (unconfirmed by me at present) that Madeleine “who cares about Iraqi children?” Albright (whom I personally saw hiding by lying on the back seat of her SUV as the moral coward fled the very effective extemporaneous, and very eloquent verbal onslaught of twenty-one-year-old Palestinian-American UC Berkeley valedictorian Fadia Rafidi’s response to her keynote address to the graduates) recommends (in addition to dividing Iraq, against the will of its citizens, into three ethno-sectarian parts) maintaining a force of some 40-60,000 or so for who knows how long. And why not? After all, it would be a shame to waste all those billions of dollars spent on very American military bases there. I mean, what use have Iraqis for miniature golf courses, bowling alleys, Pizza Huts, and Burger Kings?

      • Kathleen

        do you have a link to Albright’s address and the response from Rafidi. I will go looking.

        I have heard Albright say diplomacy diplomacy with Iran.

        she was on C-span’s Washington Journal recently and when someone called in and said that Jimmy Carter was a bigot and anti-semite…Albright disagreed but then went onto to criticize Carter’s book “Palestine Peace, Not Apartheid”

      • Kathleen

        Those oil pipe lines from Kirkuk to Haifa are critical

        http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=332835&sw=Haifa+Mosul

  • Taters

    With apologies to former est folks…

  • Taters

    So Obama is fawning and gushing over Reagan to pander to the right? The ersatz Gipper who introduced the term/adjective “homeless” into our American vocabulary. Perhaps he’s fondly recalling people pushing shopping carts with all their worldy belongings in numbers previously unseen or imagined. Reaganomics? Reagan said deficits don’t matter. Anyone believe that bullshit? Is he (Obama) out of his mind? It must really be a pain in the ass to wake up every day and constantly defend this clown. He simply is not a leader. And the “I’m a uniter, not a divider” theme has already been perpetrated in another playbook.

    Reagan said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

    I’ll bet you our veterans would really appreciate a functioning government that is there to help. This same kind of thinking led to the tragegy of Walter Reed. Katrina. The mining disaters. Poison from China. Not heeding the ‘Bin Laden determined to strike in US’ daily briefing.
    A contempt of government will not allow one to govern properly. The next POTUS is is really going to need to do some heavy lifting to get us out of this mess.

    Now what kills me is we have some bozos slamming Bill Clinton’s presidency – fair enough – but while their candidate of choice is hearting rightwingers with their make believe hero??? (That means Reagan to you Obama supporters)
    Why do I often get the idea that many Obama supporters are incapable of nuanced thinking and may very well have previously voted for Sanjaya? And many of them seem to share a more than healthy dose of contempt for history.
    They should be glad est isn’t recruiting anymore.

  • TeakWoodKite

    Where’s the beef?
    I think the question these days is not where but “Is the cloned beef safe to eat?”

  • Hope

    Thank you Larry! It is always refreshing to read what you have to say as it is raw and no-nonsense.

    It is very easy to get lost on what Obama says as he is quite an orator, but that is where it all stops. Haven’t we had enough bullshit already? When do we learn in this country? Personally, Obama gives me the creeps. He’s just too polished, too pristine, too neat, and pretty to be real. Where’s the beef?

    • norris morris

      He’s packaged, creepy, opportunistic and his politics are far more to the right than Edwards or Hillary.

      He is a product of the Pritzker Billions machine in Chicago, and his donors [large ones] are heavy corporate,nuclear,healthcare, etc. Hyatt Hotels. S&L’s….

      His Bio can be found re: voting record carefully hidden on Google, and Washington Post will give you his voted in US Senate.

      Some of his votes are even creepier. He is a lightweight who has limited experience and no outstanding track record as a legiislator.

      He orates with preacher passion, and this is very hypnotic when we see the crowds on Preacher TV.
      I find him thin in experience and vague on substance. He is no way qualified for this very daunting job. His background reveals inconsistencies about his so called votes and/or positions.

      • Nellie

        Rezko’s Connection with Obama. Long story short; Obama bought his house for $300,000 less then Market Value. He buys the adjacent land for $500,500 less than the previous purchase price. Obama knew Rezko was under indictment at the time of his real estate purchases. He also knew Rezko was under Federal Investigation, when he accepted money from Rezko for his Senatorial Campaign., This is eerily similar to the beginning of the list of crimes in the Wilkes/Duke Cunningham affair.

        http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4111483&page=1

        Has anyone checked out the amount of down payment, mortgage, Real Estate Taxes etc on Obama’s Illinois house? What about Obama’s housing in DC? The figures don’t seem to add up to be affording so much real estate. Does an Illinois Senator make enough to buy a 1.6 million dollar home, less that one year after becoming a US Senator who started at about $165,000 per year?

  • Taters

    Your point is not lost on me Larry.

    • TeakWoodKite

      Taters,thanks for calling what it is.
      swords scimitars…

      Larry, it would be great if Obama would do the same.

  • TeakWoodKite

    Two things:

    1)This ends with:

    And we, in turn, deserve to permit ourselves to feel inspired, if only for a night.

    Is that night November 4th? Or a night of drinking?

    2) Won’t the morning after be awkward?

  • Cee

    LOL! Hmmmmmmm…maybe Jim Jones did work for the CIA. LOL!

    • http://mediamonarchy.blogspot.com media monarchy

      it’s funny that lj makes that reference, but i guess it takes one to know one…

      “As the massacre unfolded, Jones can be heard on a tape recording yelling, “Get Dwyer out of here!Richard Dwyer was later found at the airstrip, methodically washing his hands. In 1968, Dwyer was listed in the publication Who’s Who in the CIA. When asked if the allegation was true, he replied, “No comment.”

      • Cee

        God. I was joking. Wow.

        • Cee

          Hmmmmmmmm…

          After receiving complaints lodged by relatives of cult members, Congressman Leo Ryan visited Jonestown on November 18, 1978 to investigate allegations of human rights abuses. Congressman Ryan, a noted CIA critic, had authored the Hughes-Ryan Amendment, which would have required the CIA to disclose to Congress — in advance — details of all covert operations. The State department offered Ryan no answers or assistance, despite numerous inquiries. He arrived with U.S. embassy official Richard Dwyer, as well as some journalists. Among the reporters was Tim Reiterman, who had covered the Patty Hearst story for the San Francisco Examiner.

          In all likelihood, Ryan already suspected what was really going on at Jonestown. That was when all hell broke loose.

          At the airstrip, Leo Ryan soon became the first congressman to die in the line of duty, along with four reporters. (The Hughes-Ryan Amendment was killed in Congress soon afterwards.) The assassins were described by witnesses as “glassy eyed,” “mechanically-walking zombies,” and “devoid of any emotion.” Dwyer and Reiterman were also shot. Soon after that, the mass slaughter began. A plausible explanation for the events that unfolded is that Jim Jones (or someone else) ordered the murders after Ryan’s unexpected visit threatened to expose what was happening. In the chaos that followed, a mass extermination was carried out.

          http://conspiracypage.wordpress.com/2007/10/24/jonestown/

  • PrchrLady

    I am sure Klein has been drinking SOMETHING, to have written that piece. I am not sure it is Obama’s fault he did… and I do agree with you Larry, that it is crazy to even try to compare Obama to some kind of saviour or something. America, and people like Klein do nothing to help the American people find the best candidate, when they drool so slovenly over any one of them. All have faults as well as good qualities. My personal thoughts on Obama are that he is an exceptional orator, and has many admirable qualities, but he is not yet seasoned, or experienced enough. His time has not yet come. Perhaps a VP candidate, and maybe 8 years from now, a WH bid…

    • Cee

      Lady,

      Obama is playing to win.

      Leading The Village By Their Collective Snouts

      by tristero

      Like Digby, I am puzzled – and appalled – by Obama invoking Reagan as some kind of icon of positve change. It’s like an aspiring surgeon saying he wants to follow in the bloody footsteps of Jack the Ripper, even if surely he disagrees with some of Saucy Jack’s procedures.

      But Obama isn’t stupid, so he clearly is no Reaganite. Therefore, I am entertaining the possibility that perhaps this is an extremely clever rhetorical strategy on Obama’s part, complete with a dog whistle to people like you and me. Surely Obama knows modern rhetoric better than any other American politician and most cultural observers. So I think this may be a plausible explanation of what he’s up to:

      Obama believes the country isn’t in love with conservative ideas per se. But both the voters – but especially the press – loved the way Reagan packaged them.

      That is what I think Obama is saying – Republicans win merely on packaging, not on widespread support of their ideas. And he thinks he can win very wide support simply by associating liberal/moderate ideas with an updated version of Reagan’s manufactured persona. Going even further with this, Obama is addressing not “the American people” directly, but the people who serve as the mediator between politicians and the people, ie, The Village. This makes sense. After all, The Village are the ones who first have to accept and then spread a politician’s manufactured persona. As for Reagan’s conservatism, Obama understands that The Village neither knows or cares very much about that, beyond a few short slogans – “death tax, partial-birth abortion,” yadda yadda. In other words,

      Obama is trying to appropriate the Reagan-Love that The Village feels – and by extension, felt by the voters they influence – for himself.

      It doesn’t matter that it’s all illusion. By co-opting not the legacy of Reagan but simply his image within The Village, Obama makes it difficult for Republicans to paint themselves without a fight as the only heirs of the cheerful, confident, can-do America that Reagan’s myth says he was.

      Now, we know Reagan was nothing like his image, And Obama knows we know. That’s the dog whistle. His Reagan-loving is just bait for a corrupt press corps fixated on images and perceptions. He is playing their own game against them, and he is much smarter than they.

      A caveat: Obama truly is a genius at talking in a manner which makes you think he’s saying what you hope he’s saying. So I could be wrong and a President Obama could be Reagan-lite, God help us. But whatever Obama is up to here, I hope he knows what he’s doing. Despite his image, Reagan was a catastrophically bad president, the worst in my lifetime until Bush (and then his son).

      Reagan is no one to hold up as an example to Democrats without a damn good reason. That is why I supect Obama has one.

      • norris morris

        This is all part of the overarching desire to be a rich African American millionaire/billionaire Oprah clone. A
        Oprah has long been a closeted Republican.

        Republican African Americans pride themselves in that they are not seen as “victims”. Condy Rice, Colin Powell are the role models along with corporate heavies.

        • CK

          And this is bad because?

        • Cee

          Norris,

          If Obama and Michelle had this desire they would have made other choices after law school.

          Next try?

        • Kathleen

          I have tried to watch her program a few times and can never figure out what all the hooplah is about. Wish she would put someone on the cover of her magazine besides herself (yawn)

    • norris morris

      After watching Obama’s performance today in praise of the great transformational Ronald Reagan from his endorserments from the Right Wing Press of Nevada, it will be even harder for me to figure out the drooling masses. Or Klein.

      Klein is Arianna Huffington’s henchman/hitman for Hillary. Huffington Post is totally biased regarding Hillary, and skews everything to Obama’s advantage.

      Before becoming a “progressive” Arianna arrrived in New York from Oxford, England as a full fledged conservative. Very conservative. After going to NY parties, writing a book on Picasso, Arianna married Mr. Huffington, a mutimillionaire conservative. Mr.H. ran for congress as a conservative, and Arianna hit the campaign trail with him. Mr. Huffington lost his bid. She had two daughters, and Arianna and Mr. H. divorced.

      Fast forward to Gore vs. Bush. Arianna morphed into a “progressive” and shreiked that Gore and Bush were alike. Her support of Ralph Nader was intense, and she took every opportunity to trash Gore and tell us Nader was the only way. Gore was even worse than Bush and to hell with Democrats…vote Green Party.

      Before creating HuffingtonPost, Arianna ran for Governor in California against Schwarznegger along with 500 other people.

      Bingo…….HuffPo is born and Obama’s the guy!
      Hillary is to be hated, shunned, revilled.

      Arianna has Klein as one of her hitmen. He consistently disses Hillary no matter what. What is she really about and what are her politics?

      Only The Shadow knows.

      • BernieO

        Boy are you right about the Huffington Post. Arianna is a gadfly. I think she particularly dislikes Hillary because Hillary is where she aspired to be. Arianna clearly had her eye on a larger prize than just wife of the Governor of California. She and hubby were rising stars until he decided to come out of the closet.

        • Kathleen

          When Arianna was recently on Air America’s Mark Greens program “7 days in America” just after Iowa. Green, Huffington and Gary Hart all ignored Edwards second place finish. The few words Arianna had to say about Edwards were basically about how he should drop out.

          Katrina from the Nation really tried to be fair and balanced about the candidates, but Mark Green swept her efforts right under the “progressive” (cough, cough) rug.

  • Kathleen

    OT Larry Air America talk show host Ed Schultz and Richard Greene are going to town with O’Reilly’s comments about “show me the Vets under bridges” comments that O’Reily made. We know that Edwards has consistently brought our attention to over the last year.

    Keith Olberman also put out the big “house them or shut up” challenge to O’Reilly. These challenges are sure to last for days now.

  • S. Markom

    Let’s contrast that to Hillary Clinton’s “real” record: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . unless you consider being the wife of a President experience. And if you do, where are the accomplishments during those 8 glorious years of Bill Clinton that qualifies either one of them as change agents? Healthcare – nothing. Energy – nothing. The economy – let’s not forget the dot.com and NASDAQ crash along with all those corporate scandals that took place during their watchful eyes.

    Also what great legislative accomplishments has she had since being handed Moynihan’s seat 7 years ago that qualifies her as a “change agent?”

    • http://NoQuarterUSA.net Larry Johnson

      Markom,
      susan has already provided reams of evidence, but try this. On a sheet of paper list every hearing Obama has chaired while in the Senate and then list the hearings chaired by Hillary.

      Then, look at the follow up investigations and legistlation produced from said hearings. Hillary kicks Obamas ass on that score. Not even close.

      • norris morris

        Markom,

        If you really want to see her votes go to Washington Post online click politics, then Congress. All senate votes and bills , details are there. See Obama’s there too.

        Bio her on Google. She has had a distinguished life if you can stand it. Seems you’ve done this before and don’t want to see the facts.. If so, why bother? Just don’t vote for her.

        I will be voting for Hillary Clinton should she be nominated.

        • S. Markom

          So you would have to admit that the only real accomplishment of this election is that Dems are NOT putting up a “D” student from Yale this time.

          Is it worth even showing up for the primary for a battle between lightweight legislatures – one with slightly more experience than the other? Sorry, but I am not buying this shared experience fog by Hillary. But if she is trying to create this myth of “35 years experience” she did have 8 years in the White House and if you look at a list of their admitted accomplishments there is zero about energy and zero about healthcare. In fact most of the major accomplishments were GOP initiatives that they had no choice but try totake credit for.

          Sorry, but I can’t get excited by either one of these so-called “change agents” who have not changed anything in public policy nor have they run anything during their “illustrious” careers.

        • S. Markom

          One more comment to that reply . . . .

          So we are to choose among a 1+ term Senator, a Senator who served only 1 term, and a Senator who has less than one term and spent most of that running for President.

          Gone are the really qualified: Dodd, Biden, and Richardson.

          The only ones drinking the Kool Aid are everyone in the party who really believe we have this great choice of “rock stars.”

          • Kathleen

            You have some solid points. “Gone are the really qualified. Dodd, Biden, Richardson”

            • TeakwoodKite

              Sadly if that was the only threshold we wouldn’t be in this pickle barrel.

              • s, markom

                Are you implying that GWB had any real experence credentials before assuming office? Or that he had anything more than a “D” average at Yale as Kerry did?

                I am upset that Iowa and N.H. have determined who I can and cannot vote for in the primary. Why do we have to settle for the lesser of evils and not for the most qualified who may not be “rock stars?”

              • TeakWoodKite

                Now days it is not about being the most qualified or the context of the Debate would be different.
                It seems to me more about maintaining the edifice of an illusion as to where “power” resides in this country.

                Will that be Kosher or Dill?

      • BernieO

        Where can this information be found?

    • norris morris

      I suggest you access all her voting records in Senate on Washington Post online…go to politics/congress. Compare them to Obama’s.

      Then Google her Bio and her distinguished record in civil rights, childrens rights, and enacting protectionist law for children, and much more from her roots as a “Goldwater Girl” to her transformation at Wellsey. Her commencement speech at Wellsey remains relevant and inspiring to this day.

      Her Bio can also be augmented from letters The New York Times published written by Hillary during Wellsley period to her friends.

      You really no nothing about her. She voted for progressive bill amendments that Obama voted against. Can also be seen in WashPost online.

      • shirin

        her distinguished record in civil rights, childrens rights, and enacting protectionist law for children

        Yeah? Tell that to the children of Iraq. Tell that to the children of Serbia. Tell that to the children of Palestine, and especially of Ghazza. Tell that to the children of Lebanon. They will be terribly glad to hear about her distinguished record in protecting children and their rights.

        • Cee

          I’m waiting to hear from Hillary’s mentor. Marion Wright Edleman (Children’s Defense Fund) stopped speaking to her years ago.

        • Kathleen

          Great points!

      • S. Markom

        So if I give a good speech at my commencement exercise does that qualify me as President.

        Her record is smoke and mirrors and expects people to buy into it.

        If she uses her husband’s records then there are no substantive accomplishmentsone should own up to other than smoke and mirrors.

        And if you are using her voting record then there are 50 Senators all equally qualified to be President. What substantive legislation did she (not Chuck Schumer who has been doing ALL the NYS work)create – not attach her name to – not just vote for?

    • BernieO

      Apparently you don’t think the S-CHIP bill was important? Hillary was a leader in getting that passed.
      There is a reason that conservative upstate New York reelected Hillary by an overwhelming margin. They know she has been an effective Senator, working hard to promote economic growth in that economically depressed region.
      Hillary has worked for years on issues like education and child health. In Arkansas she successfully spearheaded a badly needed education reform bill, among many other things.
      As for Bill, he was severely handicapped by the huge debt that had been run up by Reagan and Bush and yet he managed to turn this debacle around and put us on the road to fiscal health. That is no small thing, considering the unbelievable attacks that were being made on him (pre Monica, too) and the compliance of our media with these far right assaults. Under him, our economy was strong and it was not all because of a bubble. We were respected in the world. According to Richard Clarke, he was taking terrorism very seriously unlike his predecessors.

      • s, markom

        S-Chip was orignally a Ted Kennedy/Orin Hatch bill that happened to be during the Clinton administration. What does Hillary have to do with it? In addition S-Chip is a band-aid for a much larger problem that was not addressed during Clinton’s 8 years. If Hillary is running on being a change agent and taking liberties with taking credit for events during her husband’s administration, then where was the “change” in healthcare?

        Regarding the economy, Clinton had a conservative Congress that forced him to deal with the deficit, forced him to deal with welfare reform, and foreced him to approve NAFTA.

        Bottom line. Hillary has little experience and is no change agent as she contends.

        as far as her election, she was up against “nobodys” and there never was even contest for her original nomination. The workhorse for NYS has been and continues to be Chuck Schumer who wroks very hard while Hillary takes credit for things she has no or little part of.

        • TeakWoodKite

          Chuck Schumer who works very hard …
          Can you tell me why he would suggest the current AG?

          • s. markom

            Schumer originally had Mukasey on his list of recommendations to the President. Therefore he was in no position to go back on his word over the issue of waterboarding.

        • Taters

          What does Teddy say?

          “The children’s health program wouldn’t be in existence today if we didn’t have Hillary pushing for it from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue,” Kennedy told The Associated Press.

          President Clinton signed the bill in August 1997.

          While Kennedy is widely viewed as the driving force behind the program, by all accounts the former first lady’s pressure was crucial.

          “She wasn’t a legislator, she didn’t write the law, and she wasn’t the president, so she didn’t make the decisions,” says Nick Littlefield, then a senior health adviser to Kennedy. “But we relied on her, worked with her and she was pivotal in encouraging the White House to do it.”
          http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/10/06/clinton_claims_credit_for_child_program/

          I guess maybe you would also say Eleanor Roosevelt had no hand in integrating the US armed forces. It was all the work of Harry Truman???

          • s. markom

            This is classic Clinton revisionism. Did ted Kennedy say that in 1997 or when Hillary ran for Senate? No he conveniently said it last year when she was running for President.

            I think we can agree that many 20th century first ladies were influential in their husband’s administration to certain degrees. That does not entitle them to blanket credit for anything that happened at that time without recorded confirmation of that.

  • Kathleen

    all you have to do is ask an Obama supporter “why” they support Obama? They generally go blank for a few seconds…like a zombie and then start repeating he is the candidate of “hope” the “agent of change”. Then when you ask for proof…sparks start coming out of their ears….they have generally blown a fuse.

    It is frightening!

    • Nellie

      The reapeat, over and over again the same litany. He’s eintelligent, His stellar record as a community organizer, he makes everyone ‘feel good’, He gives us hope.

    • Pat

      There should be some concern of the phenomenon that creates such a cult, and that presupposes female submission to such a cult.

      White guys seem to be losing their touch, and it’s fairy obvious that white women never had one to begin with – at least, with other women.

      When all God’s children defer to a different God, does God still exist?

  • Kathleen

    Obama does not remind me of Jim Jones but who ever is in charge of the Obamarama spin machine must have worked for the Bush administration or studied with Karl Rove. So much media hooey

    • norris morris

      The analogy holds. I have observed glazed eyes, and irrational celebrity adoration given to this rather wan man with no ideas and a guy who we saw today who pandered to 2 uberrightwing papers in NV.

      Mr. Democracy told us how transformational and wonderful Ronald Reagan was. Yes, even more than Bill Clinton, and of course Nixon. Like the comparison?

      Mr. Obama it seems is a stinker. He’s not much of a Democrat as he heads into Reagan country and awaits any votes he can find in California no matter what he has to say or do.

      This is what the bling followers do not see. Actually they want to be redeemed and delivered. White guilt. Black pride. Hillary hate. Bush rage.

      What a cocktail, but he’s getting everybody drunk on it!

      Personally, I have a hangover already seeing the Pied Piper Syndrome in full sway.

      • Simon

        It is, essentially, the same group that bought into Rove, and Bush, buying the image, the glamour, and the fantasy, as opposed to the truth.

        They have a need to be rescued from the mundane, much like the middle aged man needing to reaffirm himself in the eyes of a twenty year old woman, say. They are hooked on the way Obama makes them feel, the excitement, the attention, the sense of uniqueness they are other wise unfamiliar with, comes to fruition when they see themselves as part of brand Barry.

        I read somewhere Obama’s handlers intended to sell an image of Obama, because his record was so weak.

        And they are, it’s the equivalent of ” what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas” giving the consumer a feeling of exclusiveness.

        But strip that glamour, referring to Obama as ordinary “Barry,” say, and the excitement, the hipness factor goes.

        Again, if the consumer ignores the lesson of Bush, they deserve Barry.

        You know how fickle Hollywood is…

    • Nellie

      I’ve been thinking the same thing. Does Karl Rove run an “Advanced Slimy Tactics” course at a college/university somewhere? Too many of Obama’s tactics seem to come directly from that playbook.

    • Shannon Williams