Obama, You Ain’t NEO
By Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on February 7, 2008 at 11:08 PM in Current Affairs
Unless you have lived in a cultural cocoon these last 10 years, you should be familiar with The Matrix, a great movie featuring Keanu Reeves who played the cyber Messiah, Neo. Well punch me in the nose and call me the Pillsbury Dough Boy, but frigging Obama believes that he is Neo. Did you hear his latest?
“We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” - Barack Obama on Super Tuesday
Are Andy and Larry Wachowski calling their copyright attorney? This is a flat out ripoff of the movie. Throughout “The Matrix,” the various characters keep asking, “is he the one we’ve been waiting for.” Hello?
Just what we need. Another fucking politician with a goddamn Messiah complex.
Taylor Marsh has more on the Obama cult (read here).
Finally, this little taste from The Matrix:
Trinity: Neo, I’m not afraid anymore. The Oracle told me that I would fall in love and that that man… the man that I loved would be The One. So you see, you can’t be dead. You can’t be… because I love you. You hear me? I love you.
[Trinity kisses Neo; Neo's vital signs return]
Trinity: Now get up!
Oh, we loves us some Bama!
(small, medium and large sizes; for both dogs and cats)
+ 
Oh, how dare you mention a racist movie where the white guy (Neo) is “the one” but the black guy who has toiled all those years (Morpheus) is second class!
Additionally, if “we are the ones” then couldn’t Hillary be the one to lead us just as well as Obama?
Morpheus was Neo’s guru/teacher silly. He was the one who had the wisdom that had to be imparted to The One.
“Oh, we loves us some Bama”?
Who is writing this stuff? Don Imus?
“Oh, we loves us some Bama”?
Who is writing this stuff? Don Imus?
ROFL!! These tactics don’t reflect well on the Clinton campaign.
However, Don got a bad rap! If it wasn’t for his show I wouldn’t have known that the Blind Boys of Alabama (black guys) had a new CD out.
Two weeks later all hell breaks loose over some stupid comment about some female athletes who will never do a thing to better my life.
Cee,
He’s mocking cultism - It isn’t about Racism
myiq2xu: I guess I was watching a different movie.
I think Mr Fishburne is a very talented actor and would think he would have done a great job portraying NEO. Ask Mr Fishburne which role he wanted. They approached him first. Really I am curious why it is racist film. Mazybe the special effects distracted me from it being as you discribed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morpheus_(The_Matrix)
Morpheus’ dream turned out to be right after all.
Obama makes a self-fulfilling prophecy statement!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_fulfilling_prophecy
You know..I have tried not to respond to this “post.” Is anyone else disturbed by the sentence, “Oh, we loves us some Bama”? I am not really a reactionary, but my consummate saleswoman of a fiance taught me something profound when we began dating. If you shut and listen, people will tell you who they are. I have kind of ignored some other posts, but this statement betrays his thoughts.
Oh, btw, Larry, the phrase “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” is supposedly a Hopi Indian saying that has been used in several songs and an Alice Walker book. Try reading the quote more carefully. The subject is “we”, and the predicate also has a “we” in it. The idea is that our future is in our own hands, and not in the hands of some future savior. Ironic that you misconstrue the statement to be a messianic delusion of Obama. Contrast that to Hillary, whose latest impromptu motto has become “Yes she can.” Notice the emphasis on the singular person, and not the collective group. Your analytical skills need some polishing, methinks.
This is pretty silly as a substantive debate, but still, I forgot why I was impressed with your postings for a while until I read the previous posting on the surge. That didn’t last long.
It sort of makes you wonder how much of Larry’s position on the Dem candidates comes from a racist perspective.
The sidebar ad for the book about the Confederacy doesn’t help his case much…
I noted on a previous post that Larry made a comment that was blatantly racist. Nothing new. His comment on this post is probably just dumb.
S Markom
It IS NOT Racist - He’s mocking cultism
“Mocking cultism.”
Is that the new code for racists? Was Imus mocking cultism when he was fired from MSNBC? Was Trent Lott miocking cultism when he made that remark at Strom Thrumond’s dinner?
This one I have to remember!
S. Markom -
Larry is not a racist.
Larry was mocking Obama zombies.
Larry is an American patriot for speaking out against false idols like Barack Hussein Obama - an individual who let his constituents freeze while he solicited a mansion from a slumlord under federal investigation for kickback schemes.
Larry like most thoughtful U.S. citizens wants responsible leadership.
You’ll have to seek redress for all of these other completely unrelated items that you randomly mentioned with Barack Hussein Osama.
Good luck as it’s cold outside…
Yes she can.” Notice the emphasis on the singular person, and not the collective group.
Jacek,
Good point. The Clinton fund rising stunt recently also made me aware of how it isn’t about the peons. Mark Penn is paid millions and the staff goes wanting until the public pays up.
No Jacek, I am NOT disturbed by Larry’s humor. If you google info on organ transplants you see that people of every hue are traveling to India and China for transplants. My point-underneath the skin, we are so very much alike, regardless of the color of the exterior.
Even though I wasn’t going to respond to your last comments in the post ‘How to Buy a Mansion, You can’t Afford’, I will as you seem to think the completely false assumptions you made are somehow fact.
1. Your accusation that I am a “Rabid Hillary Supporter” - I voted for Edwards in the primary and would have worked for him in the general. I WILL vote for Hillary, but will expend my help at the US Senate and Gubernatorial races locally. Quite a few degrees removed for a ‘Rabid Hillary Supporter’.
2. Your statement that I obviously never bought or sold a piece of Real Estate. ‘A’ being singular - you are right. I have bought 7 pieces of property - sold 6, 4 of which were multifamily units, and 2 single homes. Further, I am quite proud of the fact that each Multi Family I owned - had complete new plumbing, electrical, bathrooms, kitchens, roofing, insulation, and siding put on it within 2-3 years of purchase. My tenants stayed long term, loved their homes, volunteered to do their own snow removal and yard work. In one of my units was an elderly retired woman, who had lived there since her husband left her 28 years before with a 5 year old son. On her own, she insisted each tenant wash their hallways and stairs weekly. Her rent until the day she passed in 1984, was $18/weekly.
3. I got my Real Estate Sales License in 1973, and my Real Estate Brokers license in the spring of 1974. I kept it until I moved out of state for a few years. Then moved back because there is no place like it for quality of life and quality of environment.
4. I have been, and still am invovled with Zoning and Planning boards both locally and State wide. Unlike where you have been, we see the functions of both zoning and planning working together for the purpose of controlled growth. Out of state developers are a literal plague here. They want to come in, clear cut acerage, and build large developments. Depending on the area, we have restrictions against what we term ’slash and burn’ clear cutting. Changes in acerage required is increased frequently. There are also restrictions on how much open space, and access to a proposed home, thereby peserving much of the trees on naturally wooded lots. This way we discourage greedy developers, and make it prohibitively expensive.
5. Title seems important to you. Bush Sr thought because he had the title ‘President’ he could force a nuclear waste dump in a working class town near the VT border. A judge from the largest western NH city, with a JD from Harvard, and a very impressive resume, took the lead in preventing it. His wife contacted myself and several others around the state, with research assignments, which were completed within 10 days. The 2nd Planning Board meeting had so many people, the meeting was delayed for an hour and set up in the High School gym, which still ended up with wall to wall people. Bush Sr’s. minions kept trying to shout we had no choice, it was what the PRESIDENT had decided. All the research was presented, and then a 22 year old kid got up and said to Bush’s minion’s “We don’t give a damn if he thinks he is God Almighty. If he wants a Nuclear Dump he can put it on his own property in Texas and kill his own family slowly - we want our families to live”. After the cheering stopped the Minions knew they were defeated, and 2 of the Planning Board members resigned that night, acknowledging they had betrayed their own neighbors. The rest of the Planning Board resigned within a week - as they knew they would no longer be allowed to hold their position.
6. In Manchester, the largest NH city, the Mayor thought he could make some ‘back room’ deals with devlopers. He was voted out and without a job for 10 months. When he and his family were about to lose their home, he recanated his actions. A large meeting was called, and available city jobs were read out. As he was in his mid 50′ and portly, some were obviously not suitable. The people voted to give him a job as a water meter reader. You can google it, if you’re curious.
7. In case you think we are dumb ‘hicks’ a common error out of staters make - I was American Interantional Group’s(AIG) representative to the Insurance Service Organization (ISO) at the top of the World Trade Center for 5 years before I left and went into Education. Each Tuesday morning I flew on the Company plane into LaGuardia and met that afternoon with Maurice Greenberg, the same one that now Governor of NY Eliot Spitzer brought to justice. I left AIG, because of tremendous pressure to become involved in getting a data base money laudering system set up in the Bahamas. It was called OSA for Off Shore Accounts. The purpose of that system, was to bring non-insurance related money into the US tax free and ‘off the books’. I quit rather than compromise my own principles and integrity.
As an attorney, don’t you think it would be wise to ask questions of someone you don’t know anything about, before you try a smear campaign on the web? Or, is that your normal court room tactic?
The summary of all your comments and justifications add up to “Everyone does it”. If you are under 30, I will try to be tolerant. If you are older, I shall find it hard to bite my tongue.
Lastly, since this this seems to be a rant thread, I strongly object to your arrogance in TELLING Larry to go read what your wrote in comments. Larry, and the other former intelligence officials who post and comment here, are doing all of us a huge favor. They know intimately details on Foreign Affairs and National Security, that even those of us who watch tbhe news very closely, would not learn even 1/100th about. They could be chasing dollars or doing other things. However, they are true patriots, and expend their time as well as energy, finding public information to use as references, so that we can be wiser and more informed citizens. A little respect is due these exceptionally wonderful people.
Why apologize for supporting Hillary? Unless you are on the phone with an Air America host, there’s no reason to.
However, if you DO find yourself on the phone with, say, Randi Rhodes, get ready to be told that the only people who vote for Hillary are the people who are against Hope and against Change and are basically Corpo-Racists who want to keep America Divided because she’s Such A Polarizing Figure (TM.)
Today she had a caller from Michigan “worried that I’ll never get a chance to vote in a primary this year.” Randi agreed- and just you NEVER MIND that Michigan HAD a primary and NOTHING prevented Obama from putting his name on the Michigan ballot. Same with Florida. It’s clear that Obama supporters, who constantly tell us that they wont vote for Hillary if she’s the nominee, simply will not accept the idea that people might actually, sincerely, legitimately prefer someone other than Saint Barack for the Democratic Nomination.
John,
Limbaugh prefers Hillary.
Limbaugh show:
RUSH: All right, folks, I need to ask you a question, personal question from me to you. Do I sound like I need cheering up here? I’m getting e-mails from friends, “Boy, you sound like you could use a little cheering up.” And they’re sending me these stupid little Internet jokes, “for you to smile,” like an Internet joke would cheer me up. Spam would cheer me up. But do I sound like I need to be cheered up? I can’t wait ’til the Drive-Bys get hold of my thought, my consideration of helping Hillary raise money. They’ll miss the reason. They’ll just publicize, “Limbaugh is so upset at Romney getting out, he’s thinking of raising money for Hillary, period.”
But the reason for raising money for Hillary is because that apparently my party is relying on fear and loathing of Hillary to get the nomination, to unite Republicans, who are, some of them, off the reservation. The Republicans do not seem to be relying on leadership in their party to unite the party. They seem to be relying on all these external things, nobody is going to vote for Hillary, negative turnout factor. What if she’s not the nominee? We’ve got make sure she’s the nominee if the Republican Party is to be unified. What more loyal thing could I do than to run a fundraiser for Mrs. Clinton? You watch, though, you watch how that will be questioned.
Again- I should vote for Obama because Rush Limbaugh, Serial Liar, says he prefers Hillary? And if he said he preferred Obama, that would put you in Hillary’s camp, right?
I don’t listen to Rush, and I don’t give a fat rat’s ass who he says he prefers. Same goes for Coulter, Hannity, etc. etc.
And if he said he preferred Obama, that would put you in Hillary’s camp, right?
Of course not. My point all along is that many people think she is easier to beat.
I agree.
You know - it’s like watching American Idol playing out 24/7.
Whether we like it or not BOTH Obama and Hillary are being supported by the SAME BIG money people. The difference being that Hillary - has more indpendence. Obama literally sold himself to BIG Money in December 2006, and has zero wiggle room.
You can read all about it here. http://nymag.com/news/politics/30634/
The reality is Obama can ONLY bring as much change as his owners will allow. Since these people have gotten literally everything they want for the last 7 years, how interested do you think these corportists are in REAL change?
Talk about fairy tales - Yipes.
Further, there are just 6 Media outlets, thanks to all the mergers. http://www.corporations.org/media/ When these guys need large infusions of cash they call the Big Money people.
So ultimately the same people who finance some of Hillary’s and most all of Obama’s campaign, also control the media story.
We’ve all been played - BIG TIME! So where is the outrage?
John,
I did not feel I was apologising. My bad if it came across that way.
Simply I strongly supported Edwards.
Hillary rates high on Domestic Issues - I am not crazy about her War vote, Kyl Lieberman vote - and influx of cash from AIPAC
However, Thanks to Larry’s information on Obama’s cousin Odinga, the fact that he sent Dick Norris to Kenya, wanted to bomb Pakistan a country with Nukes, and some other information - Hillary is a much more thoughtful and saner leader.
I honestly Liked John Edwards solutions best - and if we could remove the AEI and Hudson Institute to Diego Garcia, or even Kenya - I’d feel a lot safer about foreign policy.
Well, it makes your mistakes all that much harder to understand. Well, whatever.
Please explain the humor in “Oh, we loves us some Bama!”? I find it amusing that you accuse me of smearing Larry. Would you feel comfortable saying that? If so, under what circumstances? And, what would be your intent in saying it? Finally, why is it funny?
For example, in your posting, I did not read even one sentence that smacked of racism. I thought your effort was quite fervent and admirable, but the analysis incorrect. (How did you miss the fact that the doctor earned more than the original offering price, and that a vacant lot in one of the toniest and most mature areas in a big city would not be extremely valuable? No really, I am sincerely curious about that.) In addition, in all of your comments, althogh you seem to freely enjoy insulting me (I try not to do the same…hope I accomplished that, but sorry if I didn’t), I find your dissent to be well-intentioned and reasoned.
However, Larry’s statements are making me believe that his intentions are not so well-reasoned but more because Obama is a “n____.” He states that Obama is not qualified, and I acceped that as his opinion being free of racial bais. Now, not so much. I wouldn’t say what he did. Why did he say it? Is that funny to you? In your own and SusanPc’s posts, neither of you rely upon racially charged invectives.
(Aside - I asked Larry to go read the comments not from arrogance, but to spare everyone else from cutting and pasting them all over again.)
With respect to your last paragraph, I think that is why I am posting so much. I am TRULY disappointed because I respected Larry’s postings concerning foreign affairs/security issues so MUCH. However, I have been shocked by his many many postings lately. It makes me question his judgment in ALL things now. You may consider that unfair, but that is my right./
Finally, here is a nice link to read concerning Obama’s legislative record in the Senate:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2006/10/barack_obama.html
I again ask you to calm down. Oh, btw, in the 7 properties that you purchased, I assumed you used an attorney to assist in you buying them. Did your attorney go out to visit them and make sure that they are properly maintained after the closing?
With respect to the rest of your post, I literally have no idea what you are talking about or what I have written that set you off. (Btw _ I live in Seattle now, which has quite draconian land use laws, much more so than in Illinois.)
Jacek oh Jacek,
1. You cannot have it both ways - in every comment you make there is a slam or derogatroy remark and that IS insulting. To wit, your comment Well, it makes your mistakes all that much harder to understand.. There were NO MISTAKES - go and read the comments from the same Post at MyDD http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/4/20117/25087
Truthteller, who lives in the same couple of blocks as Obama, has verified the accuracy of everything I have said regarding Obama’s house.
2.IF you read Larry’s post sloowly, He is mocking CULTISM. There is NO RACISM intended! Again - you falsely accuse.
Did you actually READ Taylor’s post? http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26965
Check out the the checklist for cultish like emotional control here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_checklist
3. My point in using real life examples is that if your bend the law, no matter who you are, there are consequences - or as we say “Every Dog has its day”
4. It is my understanding that Lawyers are supposed to do something called Due Diligence.
I will not respond any further, if your comments either reflect the fact that you have NOT read an entire post, including the links, or if you persist in veering off with insulting or unrelated issues.
Simply put - we discuss facts as contained in posts - no more ‘court room type brawl tactics, or parsing of words’ - then we can talk.
Understood? So do your Due Diligence like the professional you claim to be!
Nellie,
First of all, I am not angry. But, I do like to correct factual errors and errors of ignorance. As I am not in front of you, please accept this sentence as a written statement of that intent.
So, I went to the myDD post and read every omment. The post was the same. Truthteller lives nearby? So what? My comments were concerning the transaction. How does my comments about the accounting and the process of dividing lots have to do with him living nearby? Again, this is a pretty simple transaction - the lot was divided into 2 lots; each was sold; and the vacant lot was divided again, and a portion of that lot was sold. Moneys were paid for those properties were paid and everything was full market.
2. Racism or cultism? Yah, because that is how a lot of people have interpreted it. But whatever. However, your point is well-taken. That is not something I think is a good thing, but , what can you do. Its how people are.
3. Again, no law was broken. No law was even bent as far as I can tell. if you think so, please follow standard law school analysis - IRAC…(Issue-rule-analysis-conclusion.) In other words, state the facts that comprise the crime, cite the statute that was violated, analyze and then conclude.
4. Sometimes; sometimes not. It depends on the deal. For example, lets say I represented you in the purchase of your income-producing rental homes. If you asked me to represent you in the purchase of your homes, I would not conduct due diligence of YOU. I would review the title of the home. I would not actually physically inspect the homes; you would do that or you would hire someone to do that.
Here is what I posted on another post about what a lawyer does in the deals in question though:
Please note that I am not YELLING at you, but rather, just giving you an informed commentary of what lawyers do. People would not necessarily know what it is that we do.
___________________________________________
Oh man…..I suppose from professonial interest, I am compelled to answer. Mr. Murder, the fiasco here is that Obama was funded by a guy who was a slumlord, not that Obama somehow failed to be accountable to the tenants as a lawyer tangentially connected to these developments. The attorneys are responsible for completing the paperwork for the deal, not serving as guardians of the public interest.
Let me explain how these deals are done (in a nutshell). Basically, a nonprofit community group will form a new entity in partnership with a for-profit company. The for-profit brings the commercial know-how (allegedly) to rehab the building. The nonprofit is the partner necessary to receive special local, state or federal grants. Obama’s law firm will represent the new entity. The lawyers draft the purchase and sale agreement, the loan documents, the lien instruments, and the various corporate resolutions. The due diligence(i.e investigation of the for-profit) is conducted by the banks funding the rehab project (or in this case, the City. Typically, banks do it and the funds are guaranteed by a gov’t agency.) The lawyers are not involved in confirming bank statements, financial statements and other than a sniff test when the client walks in the door. Attorneys are not really that well equipped to read and understand balance sheets, nor is the client paying us to do so. After the deal is done, the lawyer moves on to the next project and/or client, and is not involved in the project again. We prepare the paperwork; we do not monitor the housing project.
Finally, Obama was a litigator! In other words, he is the last type of lawyer you want working on a complex real estate transaction/financing like this one. I would be surprised if he knew how to draft a mortgage, let alone the complex type of lien instruments needed for this transaction.
I never post to these things, but this one did it for me. As it’s been said “When they tell you what they are…believe them.”. Larry just told me all I need to know about his true character. I truly respected him before he showed this side of himself. It also makes one wonder why if he believes in the Hill/Bill ticket is he attacking & trying to tear down Obama instead of trying to build up what he thinks the greatness of his candidate is?
Jacek since you are giving out English grammar lessons to Larry, I think you need one in French:
Your saleswoman of a fiance should be “fiancee” with the accent aigue over the former e.
Touche!
Put the accent aigue where it most uncomfortably fits!
I actually knew that, Hope..I remember that from high school french. However, the english equivalent doesn’t usually carry through the french equivalent.
Great comment. Also, qui accuse, s’accuse seems to fit.
[pursed lips, stiff with indignation, disapproving frown]
YOU CAN’T SAY THAT!
[eyes lowered, staring at shoe]
I share Jacek’s sense of bewilderment at the direction this blog has taken. I have been a loyal reader for the past couple of years and have found Larry to be a rich source of information on issues regarding security, CIA, Iraq war, Valerie Plame episode, etc., and have enjoyed watching hi commentary on Olbermann’s show. But then, out of the blue, began this non-stop onslaught of Obama animus bordering on obsession, seemingly built on innuendo and fueled with the type of histrionics (and locker room diction) usually found on wing-nut sites. I thought this whole thing had reached its nadir with the incredibly sophomoric attempt at a statistical analysis based on the primary results. My first year statistics students would easily decimate this attempted analysis for its failure to recognize the fairly obvious confounders, variables and outliers, as well as the complete lack of a mathematical construct. Spin-yes; Statistical validity – not even close. Math challenged, indeed.
Then came the NEO rant, concluding with the most condescendingly nefarious Stepin Fetchit stereotype: “Oh, we loves us some Bama.” I truly hope that this is just an example of over-enthusiastic partisan hyperbole and not an inadvertent revelation as to the underlying basis for the opposition to Obama being expressed on this blog. At any rate, this type of insubstantive racial mockery has no place in a serious discussion of the issues.
How impressive!
Oh my pond,
Since I was and still am ‘mathmatically challenged’ can you provide a nice easy to use stat number cruncher for those of us that understand general concepts, purpose and use - but those damn stat equations can drive us to seriously contemplate suicide?
So delicately stated, so sublime, oh so wonderfully magnificent and justifiably hauty!
..and to return the favor from above…it is “haughty,” not hauty, unless you meant “haute,” which would not be appropriate in this context.
Hmm, it didn;t include the smile/chuckle i put into my posts to indicate that these posts were tongue-in-cheek…no offense was intended.
The answer is very simple, if you don’t like it here, if you don’t like what is said here, then don’t come here.
I practically lived at BuzzFlash for two years. My letters were posted in their mailbag on a daily basis. Then they became ObamaFlash.com and I voiced my disapproval, as did many formerly faithful readers and we left. They are not going to change because we don’t like their point of view. So being adults, instead of staying and attacking people that we don’t agree with we went somewhere where we could find like-minded or at least fair minded people to discuss things with.
I don’t agree with everything posted by Larry on this blog. So what? Only a fool agrees with someone else 100% on every issue.But I do find the constant attempt by Obama supporters to find some racism in every remark objectionable. You might even say, dishonest. You might consider how much you alienate people when you try and insert racism into every comment.
Larry, can speak very well, and quite forcefully, for himself and doesn’t need me to stick up for him. But if you don’t agree with what he says and don’t like what he says I wonder why you keep coming here. Unless you just like to bitch and pick a fight. Which is what it certainly looks like.
Okay, I’m ready to be attacked now. Oh and please, lay off the free speech crap, I never suggested you didn’t have the right to come here, I just wondered why you did if you ain’t happy here. Seems kind of dumb to me.
Good idea!
Been a registered Democrat since 1972.
Voted for Bill Clinton twice and all I got was a Repulbican-Lite president who got a blow job.
Will never make that mistake again.
If Hillary Clinton is the top of the Democratic Party ticket…I’m voting Nader.
wow, if your a true democrat you vote for the nominee. I guess your one of those democrats for a day, thats just wrong. As a proud dem that just goes against everything I was taught. I just cant for the life of me think what Tip O’Neil would think. I bet hes turning in his grave. What a shame that you would rather have president McCain, I really dont understand why is Bill Clinton villified. I mean the nafta vote was the worse thing, I remeber him doing. Hell, I am a Union girl and that was slap in the face for us. I remember working my ass off and making really good money. I.B.E.W, (International Brotherhood of Electrical Works) actually got our pay rates back from when Regan was in office. Had to take a massive pay cut just to say competative. It looks like thats whats gonna happen again. But thats ok, cus it could be worse, like a war, high gas, high food costs and health care hikes. Oh, wait, thats whats going on now. Silly me!!!
So, you do your thing, and I will vote for the nominee. I may not like him, but he sure as hell will be better than republican. If you dont think so, God help you. I may not work my ass or anyone in the union, cus we are a special intrest group. I guess he thinks we are gonna just do what we always do, and thats GOTV. I think hes got another thing coming from my brothers and sisters.
I would not vote for a corrupt man, democrat or not.
Voting mindlessly for a nominal democrat is to surrender to the French banking industry, according to Romney, ok, I’m kidding, voting nominally for a corrupt democrat is enabling a system harmful to Americans, why would I do that?
I guess the diffrence between us is that I go do something. I dont sit around and act pious and self-rightous. I go to my local democratic meeting and if there isnt something working, I try to fix it. I guess you can call me an activist, if a pol is dirty, I dont want him. I want someone that has my intrests and the party intrests . I dont want someone that is all about him, hell, anyone can do that. I want someone that wants to make the country and the world a better place. Lets face it there are not many ppl out there like that.
So, yes, I do vote party, but I do so, with the best of intrest in this country. Perhaps, you dont understand the concept of civil duty. Making sure that our pols are clean and do the right thing is that duty.
I know a lot of tongue-cluckers who stick “Save Darfur” yardsigns out just so their neighbors can see them (while doing absolutely NOTHING to Save Darfur, piously promise to vote for Nader if Hillary is the nominee, and spend pretty much every waking moment trying to convince us great unwashed masses how Enlightened and Pure they are.
They are the Republican Party’s best friends.
Love your reference to the Icon Tip O’Neil!
I have a better idea. If Hillary is the nominee this year, just vote for McCain. Same difference.
Idiots like you gave us eight years of Bush instead of Gore. Might as well keep up the great work, and get us started on eight years of John McCain. But please, spare us the “I hate this evil war” BS when McCain puts us into Iran next year. Because you gave him the green light.
Some people are really just too damned stupid to be trusted with the ballot.
>>> Voted for Bill Clinton twice and all I got was a Repulbican-Lite president who got a blow job.
Personally, I never got laid off while Slick Willie was in, and I didn’t feel that my government was out to screw me, tap my phone, read my mail, take my house, pension and Social Security and give it to rich bastards in Wall Street.
The economy was good enough that I could afford to go put on a date and perhaps get my own BJ occasionally.
Unlike the last seven years.
>>> If Hillary Clinton is the top of the Democratic Party ticket…I’m voting Nader.
Hope you enjoy what you get… a McCain administration.
At least he was just a regular crook (Keating Five) and not a Chickenhawk, draft-dodging coward, like the present idiot/hypocrite.
Well said
. . . and you better not be gay, poor, Muslim, Mexican, in need of any major medical care, or be anything other than a good solid Sunday Christian - ’cause the McCain Court and Administration will make Bush seem down right liberal . . .
Nader vote, now there was a REAL help for Peace and Freedom in the world . . . \snark
Maybe Larry’s sick of the way thin-skinned Obamamaniacs slaver and hyperventalate over every little perceived slur to Their Leader.
As a former Deaniac, the behavior on the part of online Obama supporters is uncomfortably familiar. Hysterical outrage over “slights.” Deifying every little quirk and utterance of the love-object. Long posts musing about how stupid people are who vote for the other candidate. Wonderment that the voters “just don’t get it.”
It’s going to be an ugly day out in Obama-Land when the bubble bursts. But don’t say you haven’t been warned. We’ve been here before, in 2004. Ask any Deaniac. They can tell you.
Maybe Larry’s sick of the way thin-skinned Obamamaniacs slaver and hyperventalate over every little perceived slur to Their Leader.
Fribbles,
Since you have such insight, can you tell me the difference between the Obamamaniacs, Obambis, Orange (whatever it was),Obama Nation and Obamabots?
I need to know what cult I’m in as I follow my dear leader. LOL!
I forgot to add sarcastic *sshattery toward those who hold up the mirror.
No cult talk now!
WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton told roaring partisans she’s the candidate of “dreams and practicality.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/08/hillary-clinton-im_n_85729.html
You forgot the Obamazoids!
Yes, I also was for Dean - I did have a little bit of “starry eyes” but that was because he actually had concrete ideas and he was quite partisan unlike the new “Kid”.
Another difference was the media against Dean before the Primary season (I believe that Dean had favorable treatment from the media at about 37%, while Edwards and Kerry’s was in the 70’s. Dan Abrams came out with his study and the new “Kid” is getting high 80’s% favorables, while Clinton is at 47%.
You are right though, there were quite a few kool aid drinkers for Dean - but, I think that it is much, much worse with the Obama followers.
Folks,
When in doubt call me a racist. Let me turn the issue on its head, if Barack was not black (or at least considered black), would folks be as enthusiastic about a white guy who is a clever speaker with no significant accomplishments on his resume?
And I will repeat my “obsession” about Obama. He is not qualified to be President. Not yet. He does not have enough experience or knowledge about the Washington bureaucracy–especially the national security bureaucracy.
I am scared to death of the cult of personality. We gave Bush a pass in 2000. He was a likable guy (at least then). Earnest. Not a lot of experience running successful operations and zero experience on the foreign policy front. So, excuse me for my obsession, but Obama is not competent. If elected he will make the kind of mistakes that will pave the way for a Republican backlash. But I’ve resigned myself to the fact that we are dealing now with emotion, not reason.
I agree with the comments on the role emotion has been playing in Obama’s movement. For some reason today, I got up disturbed about an uncomfortable flavor of militancy to Obama’s campaign. That phrase he is using as one of his themes, “now is our time” keeps coming back to me. It is getting a little creepy.
Almost seems a little hysterical, doesn’t it?
If you are using “reason” then what resume (I mean real resume) does Hillary Clinton have?
As a Senator she has had no major legislation since she came to office. Prior to that she was the wife of a President who did not have security clearance and therefore was not part of that team in any way (unless something shady was going on). And prior to that she was the wife of a Governor. Her real career was as a corporate attorney with the Rose Law Firm and more recently running for President for the past 7 years.
So other than smoke and mirrors pray tell what exactly makes her more qualified than Obama?
Frankly I am not thrilled with either choice and would have preferred someone with real experience like Joe Biden but he’s not a “rock star.”
Both Clinton and Obama are highly intelligent people and both have limited experience in office. So for me the difference is integrity and judgement. Therefore it has to be Obama.
integrity and judgement.
Integrity. Leaving people to freeze without running water and saying he did not know. (lie)
Judgement Rezko. (poor)
“now is our time” ? What line has Obama been waiting in too long?
Yes!
I agree with you Larry, but what I wonder is why you think Hillary has a better chance of beating McCain than Obama? Here is part of a quote from a poster from huffpo
“If Clinton is the Democratic nominee, I know from personal experience living in the buckle of the Bible belt that her name alone strikes fear & loathing into the hearts of right-wingers, especially many evangelical Christians. She will unwittingly mobilize them to vote against her in droves.”
Ask your self this what is more important winning the election or going with the best candidate?
There are currently three candidates Hillary, Obama and McCain
McCain will be nothing but more of the same so it is obvious we dont want him. He will have months to rally and unify his base against not Hillary or Obama but against the Democrats in general who will be portrayed as weak on national security and as Mitt Romney said “a vote for a Democrat is a vote for the terrorists”.
So that leaves us with Hillary and Obama.
Hillary is divisive and will generate exactly the kind of conditions that the poster I quoted above said. Will Obama generate the same? Maybe but maybe not.
So my point is simple. Do you back someone who is the better more qualified candidate that through NO fault of her own will guarantee that McCain wins or do you back a candidate that might have even a slim chance of winning?
I believe the answer is obvious.
You’re right- let’s only nominate candidates that the Republicans approve of. The GOP hates Hillary, so she’s out. Republicans seem to like Obama, so he’s ok.
I’m sure the Republicans will someday return the favor and ask Democrats who they would like the GOP to nominate.
I have a better idea- let’s not assume that the Democrats can’t ever win any battles worth winning, so we’d better spend the next four years bending over backwards to accomodate the Republicans, because maybe if we give them EVERYTHING they’ll stop being mean and calling us Terrorist Supporters and (gasp) Liberals.
Evangelicals cannot carry an entire election. Independents and motivated Dems will determine this election. Self-identified Republicans are dwindling while more people are identifying with the Dems even if they haven’t officially joined the party.
>>> …would folks be as enthusiastic about a white guy who is a clever speaker with no significant accomplishments on his resume?
You mean like, oh for instance, Gary Hart?
Where’s a Donna Rice when we need one.
He was a likable guy (at least then). Earnest.
Larry are you not being subjective? I take it you have met GWB?
The guy gave me the creeps in 2000 as he does now… he was an enforcer for his dad, I have read.
But was he vetted back then and was GWB ever qualified? Regan did not think so…
We gave Bush a pass in 2000
Ah, Larry,
Speak for yourself. I knew how jacked up he was and I switched parties to try to get McCain (the best at the time) as the nominee.
I think Noonan made some good points in this article.
Mrs. Clinton is stoking the idea that Mr. Obama is too soft to withstand the dread Republican attack machine. (I nod in tribute to all Democrats who have succeeded in removing the phrase “Republican and Democratic attack machines” from the political lexicon. Both parties have them.) But Mr. Obama will not be easy for Republicans to attack…
With Mr. Obama the campaign will be about issues. “He’ll raise your taxes.” He will, and I suspect Americans may vote for him anyway. But the race won’t go low.
Mrs. Clinton would be easier for Republicans. With her cavalcade of scandals, they’d be delighted to go at her. They’d get medals for it. Consultants would get rich on it.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120241915915951669.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
Are you aware of the republican emails being circulated, regarding Obama, mainly centering on his ties to Rezko, and Auchi,(and republicans should know…).(one site is breakpoint.com, I believe, but I will check).
It’s best this information be vetted BEFORE the democratic nominee is chosen, to avoid a sure loss to the Republicans.
I do not like Karl Rove, in the least, but he is smart when it comes to marketing his candidates, he can read the public very well.
I can also foresee Rove using Obama’s connections to reprise the “weak on terror” meme against the democrats, perhaps even costing them Senate and House seats…
Is that such a leap, given Rove’s battle techniques?
Simon,
I’m aware of what the GOP is doing. How much of it has come from what was printed here and at the other pro-Hillary blogs?
Mudkitty is right. We need to end the circular firing squad and be careful of what we say.
I cursed at you the other day. I regret it but these unfounded remarks piss me off!
Did you deduce that Obama was tied to terrorists or did someone from the GOP say so?
David Schuster is sure thinking of that today.
Sorry Mr. Murder. You might not get your debate.
“I, at this point, can’t envision a scenario where we would continue to engage in debates on that network,” he added.
Clinton and Barack Obama are scheduled to participate in an MSNBC debate Feb. 26 from Ohio, which holds its primary March 4. The Clinton campaign has pushed hard for as many debates as possible with Obama, but Wolfson said the Feb. 26 debate could be jeopardized.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UMAS3O0&show_article=1
No, no, Obama is tied to Rezko, and Auchi, directly, through campaign donations.
Have you read the Chicago Sun Times or the London Times, both in regard to Obama, Auchi and Rezko?
They have both made the connections. Given Auchi’s relationship with Sadaam, and the network that eventually connects back to Congress, and the Pentagon, it’s there.
Combined with Brewster-Jennings work, and the Plame case, back to Cheney, well, it’s just waiting for a special prosecutor.
Not very difficult, you have Google?
And Cee, you are really are intelligent, you have given me so much information, I am so indebted to you.
Really, you’re a wealth of information.
No, no, Obama is tied to Rezko, and Auchi, directly, through campaign donations.
Have you read the Chicago Sun Times or the London Times, both in regard to Obama, Auchi and Rezko?
Simon,
I’ve read it all. There is nothing there!!
Will you believe it if Clinton supporters say it?
Rezko STILL Not An Issue
By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Thu Feb 07, 2008
At FDL, one of our favorite blogs, a post argues that Rezko IS an issue for Obama. Both Jeralyn and I are on record stating our view that Rezko is NOT an issue…. In this light the Rezko connection become ominous. But a little research shows this entire construction to be [false.]
Pols are pols and to expect them to scrutinize every donation they get is simply ridiculous. In my review of Obama’s dealings with Rezko, I see nothing untoward. It remains a nonissue in my view.
http://www.talkleft.com/
We need to end the circular firing squad and be careful of what we say.
The “circular firing squad” assumes that people are shooting at the same object.
Be careful of what we say?
What a breathtakingly stupid post. “Mr Obama will not be easy for the Republicans to attack…the race won’t go low…”
The ability of Obama supporters to delude themselves is just astonishing. The GOP will gut Obama like a cold fish this autumn. And it wont even be hard.
They’ll go after Hillary too, of course, but she’s already proven she can fight back. The only thing Obama has proven is that he’s good at hiding behind his starry-eyed zombie followers. And he’s still whined over the perceived slights tossed at him by the Clintons. Wait till the GOP gets at him- the great mass of Obamaniacs will provide very little covering for him when THAT storm arrives.
John,
I don’t agree with Noonan regarding the GOP not using a racial attack.
The rest of your comments make you sound like a scared loser. Buck up, babe!
Gee Cee-
Once again you resort to your tiresome two words - racist and sexist…
No wait -
You’re calling John “babe”. Now you are being sexist. I mean unless he’s your child or something…
P.S.: Still no rebuttal to Michelle Obama being a corporate whore?
When did the Republicans not go low? Making up lies about John Kerry’s military service was not the lowest of the low?
Rita,
The attacks on John McCain are low.
Some GOP nuts are saying he wasn’t tortured in Vietnam. Others are saying he’s crazy.
I disagree with him on most issues these days but attacking a former POW is a line I won’t cross.
Larry just to name one:
Personality Cult of White Men:
L. Ron Hubbard, Founder of Scientology. He spoke well and had little to no true accomplishments other than his badly written science fiction novels which he transformed into his pseudo religious doctrines.
Wow Hope! Perfect example of a Social/Religious cult.
Thank you - I understand your notes, and admit that Obama has the “Black Shield” to deflect the close examination without “racism” being flung about like monkey shit at the zoo . . . we have been reduced to ignoring the fact that Edwards and Hillery both have/had better plans, ideas and practical experience, but both lacked the cult appeal and the imaginative spark “that a black person could be elected” . . . the time for wishing upon a star is long past . . . Pinocchio had a wooden head.
Just a quick shoutout to Larry Johnson, b/c I took your name in vain over at FDL on 2/7 (on a thread about Obama’s comment about ‘claws coming out’, which IMHO was a veiled smack at Hillary). Please consider this my ‘due diligence’ ; >)
I chuckle every time I recall your commentary that ‘the Dems are pussy whiners’ — although after the FISA cave-ins, I’m losing my remaining shreds of good humor. Like Fred Dobbs, at least under Bill Clinton, I didn’t think about the government tapping my phone, siphoning tax revenue to underwrite Halliburton, Blackwater, et al.
As for the Hillary/Obama contest, until I watched the way that Edwards, who received **almost** as many votes as Hillary in Iowa was absolutely ignored by the press, I didn’t really have a dog in this fight. But after watching the sh*t that Hillary Clinton got dumped with after Iowa, I really started to admire her toughness and resiliency. I don’t see that same quality in Mr. Obama, despite his obviously gifted eloquence.
At any rate, in the interest of living up to my screen pseudonym, I thought this thread might be a good place to pass along something that I just spotted, and it’s relevant to the Hillary/Obama kerfuffle. Early in my workday, I needed to check out something related to manga (think Japanese novels in graphic form, and that’s sorta-kinda close).
In case you are not familiar with it, manga is a splendid visual/literary art form that is widely read. It’s one of the fastest-growing segments in publishing, and most of its readers tend to be ages 12 - 34. It’s fairly new in the U.S., but that demographic has an insatiable appetite for manga (at least, where I live).
That would be an ideal ‘market’ for Obama to reach with his ads, and sure enough, there are Obama ads all over a US ‘manga‘ website that I’ve been clicking on today. Note the excellent ad placement — upper center of the pages, which is the most expensive — at this link: http://anime.about.com/od/animeprimer/Anime_Primer.htm
(That link is to a main entry page, but I suspect that if you read this comment and click over there within 24 hours of me leaving this comment, you’ll see Obama ads all over that website. And Obama’s campaign is paying premium ad space on the top center of the site pages.)
Maybe some of Hillary’s next ads should incorporate manga? And yeah, I’ll bet that Neo was a big manga fan.
Interesting to see what the global village is bringing our way, eh?
Anime is cold to me, so artless.
The kids seem analogous to those we called “satanists” in the 70’s, and 80’s.
Those dumb boys who listened to black sabbath and smoked too much pot, getting some girl pregnant at seventeen, facilitating a move into their parent’s house shortly after the shotgun marriage, still smoking pot at 28, even after having 3 kids.
They suffer from ulcers at thirty four, divorce at forty, and either get it together and settle, or die, angry alcoholics.
Just something missing. Funny, it appeals to the Obama crowd, too?
Doesn’t manga mean “to eat” in Italian?
Hero worship, cultism and Fascism share a common trait: they eliminate the need for reasoning and independent thought and, by extension independent action.
I’d have thrown Religion in there too, but it seems many have their goats tethered on very short leads these days.
Black Sabbath, Blue Oyster Cult, and J Giels Band; Nassau Coliseum 1978.
I was deaf for a week.
I couldn’t stand that music, it was always a soulless bore to me, with the exception of J. Giels.
Maybe I thought it was simple, nothing to challenge me, that might have been it. It was always the loser stoners who listened to it, (not you , of course) the guys who never had anything to say, or think, for that matter.
Even the Yes and Genesis crowds were a little better, they had pretensions toward intellectualism, and I do admire Jon Anderson as a great songwriter.
As a kid, I was introduced to early American rock and roll through the radio, little community college stations would play the most obscure oldies, big mama thorton singing hound dog, or jewel atkins.
I grew up in Chicago, we had a radio station, WXRT, in the 70’s and 80’s would play anything from Chuck Berry, to Yes, to Elvis Costello, to Beethoven to Muddy Waters, to the Doors, to Motown. Early morning, around 4:oo am, the DJ would play the whole side one of Yes’ “Tales from Topographic Oceans” and I would lie in bed, fully entranced, eventually memorizing each and every note, until I could play it on the piano, by ear, mimic Jon Anderson’s vocal inflections perfectly. And of course, that album being based on Stravinsky’s Firebird, I had to go find out about Stravinsky, borrowing albums from the public library.
I miss that radio, though the internet has come up with great stations.
FWIW:
You’re not even talking about the kind of content that I reference. Some of the shogun-manga can be rather ‘vivid’ and there is also a horror genre. I have a very educated hunch that the individuals (the ‘losers’) you describe in your comment probably have undiagnosed reading or learning disabilities, so they never found reading and school work very engaging. Because they were not successful at school, they hung out and started drinking. They were either the class clowns, or the class hoods. (FWIW, a lot of research and anecdotal evidence shows that kids with learning disabilities engage in earlier, more frequent drinking, sex, and drug use.) Kids with learning disabilities often reach adolescence without the tools they needed to compete at anything but sports, drugs, or sex. However, as we have all seen, it doesn’t preclude them from becoming President of the United States.
Frankly, one of the best features of manga is that it often reaches kids who don’t find ‘normal books’ engaging. If it gets them reading, that’s a splendid thing!
Manga express a wide range of emotions and capture the imaginations of millions of people, many of whom have almost certainly never heard of “Black Sabbath” and wouldn’t like it if they heard it.
In good manga, like good stories everywhere, the decent but honorable people fight against terrible odds, evil villains, and ingenious demons. But good overcomes evil in the end, generally the worse for wear, but eventually prevailing.
Nothing wrong with that in my view.
Are you saying I pick on cripples? (lol)
All I need to do is look at the art, the work or language, I see no need to feed kids junk food.
You’re presenting a very simplistic, prosaic argument, ie, it’s art, or worthy, because of what YOU, the viewer, project onto it, (again, defining deconstructivist, analogue literary theory.) But what you perceive when you look at the picture is far different from what I see, it all boils down to how we comprehend the world around us, our level of sophistication, and our choices. If, after a certain amount of time, your argument about the use of anime in the classroom produces children who are illiterate, we have a problem, and need to find something else. And given you’re reiterating an old 70’s concept,(let’s teach with comic books, say, at least the kids will be interested) I would say manga, as you see it, doesn’t work. Try teaching Tolstoy, it’s the same, good and evil, but written by talent, and it too, can capitalize on manga. Kids can handle it, even the learning disabled.
It comes down to the teacher, feeding the baby a pacifier dipped in sugar, to keep him quiet, doesnt it?
I didnt care for the whole Neo craze, I thought it was gassy, pretend, lacked teeth.
You see it as relevant, good movie making?
Interesting.
In the long term, destroys the teeth.
Chrissie Hynde and Britney Spears both sing of love, who is the artist, and who is the pretender?
What is great art? What is worthy? You’re selling trash as nutrition, it simply doesn’t work.
Why arent’ children capable of ciritical thinking?
All the words are there, but no depth of thought.
Why?
Why arent’ children capable of ciritical thinking?
The truth is they are. It is the cultivation of it in our k-12 system and culture in this country that GOES OUT OF ITS WAY, to not make this a top priority. The premise of “teaching to the test” is to subvert this critical skill.
The truth is they are. It is the cultivation of it in our k-12 system and culture in this country that GOES OUT OF ITS WAY, to not make this a top priority. The premise of “teaching to the test” is to subvert this critical skill.
What Rat Pack does Obama belong to?
Larry, follow up — that ad may not show up in your browser. I just realized that the Obama ads are showing up for me b/c I’m in a state with a caucus still to come. But perhaps some other Obama-related text will show up in your browser at that link.
Please stop with the circular firing squad - it’s sooo yesterday’s republican.
I agree with you, Larry. He is not qualified or proven. The cult mentality following him now scares me, too. Not based on substance. Just charisma. Look at what we are inheriting from Chimpy and Darth. Scary. Hillary can get a strong start cleaning up some of the mess.
Let’s be practical. Let’s be real, people!
What is the point; emotion vs reason?
Will anyone be suprised when the Supreme Court goes past the 5-4 to the right and the court takes up a challenge and rules against the plain language of the Constitution because it is the emotional thing to do?
The choice of the Matrix is interesting because
‘we’(oops)are inguaged in an asymetrical conflict, much of which is kept below the event horizon and global in size. People have died attepmting to expose just the contours of what lies at waters edge. Just remember the bullets are in slow motion but are still deadly.
What is coming will be deadly for this country. Does Obama know where the skeletons are?
Does Mrs Clitnton? Does either of them understand the extent of the corporate replication which is this US goverment?
Am I the only one who wishes to escape from Plato’s cave?
WeI can not count on a coluded MSM media for anything more than emotional SY-ops. The “blogs-o-sphere” appears to becoming more MSM co-opted every day. I remember when it was more like Deadwood.OT I wish to thank Shirin for making me more aware of the use of ‘we’ and ‘us’ and other similars. Try writing without them.
It’s going to be one or the other, folks.
And it’s going to be a dream ticket.
I’m supporting Hillary, for the record. I think Obama will make a fine president 8 years from now.
But if Obama gets the nod, are you seriously going to throw it to McPain?
Some of you sound like Limbaugh and Coulter in reverse, with their McLame hatred.
Stop giving ammo to rightwingers. Stop eating your own.
The phrase, “we are the ones we have been waiting for,” is the last line of “Poem for South African Women” by June Jordan, published in her collection, *Passion: New Poems, 1977-80*.
http://junejordan.com/byjune.html
It has been attributed to the Hopi elders, made into a song by Sweet Honey in the Rock, used as a book title by Alice Walker, and now quoted in the course of a presidential bid…
This Charlatan Wants to Be President of the United States of America!
Speaking in front of crowds in New Orleans, Barrack Hussein Obama promised he would fix the problems with the levees. Woo hoo! Better not let them talk to the now homeless people he dumped in Rezko’s Chicago slums at millions of dollars of taxpayer expense…
Speaking in Idaho Barrack Hussein Obama expressed his support for gun ownership. Maybe we’ll get to see him pretending to hunt like John Kerry?
Speaking to Move-On.org Barrack Hussein Obama expressed his support for legalizing marijuana. Well, he admitted he likes drugs in his crappy book.
Speaking in California Barrack Hussein Obama expressed his support for drivers licenses for illegal aliens. What’s Obama going to pander to next: a passport and a gun too?!
Speaking to his friend and cousin running for the Presidency of Kenya, Barrack Hussein Obama expressed his support for his friend, who also supports strict Muslim law, which mandates putting women in veils. Screw him and his women hating cousin.
Speaking to indicted/jailed Syrian friend of 20 years Rezko, Barrack Hussein Obama expressed his support for not revealing too much about him to the federal investigators. Nothing here to look at folks, I’m just the new MLK/JFK!! He even does distracting sideshow impersonations of them when he speaks going from a southern accent to a Boston accent.
Speaking to a crowd of Hispanics, Barrack Hussein Obama said he would learn Spanish. He did get the “Yes We Can” line down…
Speaking in Kansas, Barrack Hussein Obama admitted he was actually half-white. But he failed to add that he loathed the white part…
Speaking in front of a national audience on television, Barrack Hussein Obama said that he would have to see how well Bill Clinton could dance before he could consider him a “brother”. Can you imagine if a white person said that about him?!
Speaking to a national audience, Barrack Hussein Obama said he voted against the war, (or actually would have) and then voted to fund the war when he actually could vote. Dizzy yet?
Speaking in the Illinois State Senate, Barrack Hussein Obama expressed his opposition, no actually his support, well actually his “I don’t know” 130 times on votes on important legislation. Incompetent.
Speaking in the Illinois State Senate, Barrack Hussein Obama explained that sometimes he hit the wrong button during votes on important legislation. Drunk, drugged or demented.
Speaking in front of crowds in California, Barrack Hussein Obama said I am not a crazy Muslim, I am a Christian and I attend a Christian church - that just gave Louis Farrakhan, radical racist black Muslim, a lifetime achievement award! Back to woohoo!
Speaking in his own words in the books he wrote Barrack Hussein Obama said:
- We were always playing on the white man’s court — by the white man’s rules.
- Obama once described the white race as “that ghostly figure that haunted black dreams.”
- During college, Obama disapproved of what he called other “half-breeds” who gravitated toward whites instead of blacks.
- At age 33, he wrote in “Dreams from My Father, that ” he found solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against his mother’s race.
Like P.T. Barnum said there’s a sucker born every minute. Idiots voted for Adolph Hitler and George Bush/Dick Cheney and followed Charles Manson and Jim Jones.
Larry’s a true patriot for speaking out against this corrupt character who is Obama!
Your repetitive “Barrack Hussein Obama” is going to be heard quite a lot more by November. I think you just wrote your first negative ad campaign for the Republican swift-boating television spots.
As opposed to Kerry, though, what Mike Howell wrote about Obama is true, though he left out the part regarding Obama’s relationship to Auchi, the middle east money launderer.
John Kerry, a legitimate Vietnam hero, was slandered, IMO, an attempt to turn a strength into a weakness.
Two different approaches, the republicans will be gaming Obama with truth, should he win the nomination, I would think it would require a different approach.
(Sorry for my stream of consciousness writing, I do love Faulkner.)
Terrific List - Very impressive
Hope, for me, Mike makes a point about how easy it is to assemble facts and present them…regardless of what side of the court you maybe on. Just add the video and 100 million in ad buys and your correct, except for the facts being negitive. Facts are like stem cells, you never know how the buggers will turn out.
Perhaps someone will post the same type of list for Hillary Rodham Clinton , just to be fair about it and we can look at them side by side.
Teak I think the negativity factor really just depends upon which side you are on and how you perceive it.
Yes and one never knows where things might end up really. Once we put something out there, we can never control the outcome or how it will affect others. It can morph into many results that were or were not intended. C’est la vie.
DID he say and do those things…or not?
That’s the question.
Stick to the subject (of Mike Howell’s post)
The Charlatan Barrack Hussein Obama claims he wants to spend more time with his voters, but only agrees to a couple of debates?
Barrack Hussein Obama could spend an hour a week with MILIIONS of voters if he agreed to weekly debates.
Quotes from Barack Obama’s crappy racist book, Dreams Of My Father:
“The person who made me proudest of all, though, was [half brother] Roy .. He converted to Islam.”
From ‘The Audacity Of Hope, “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”
From Dreams of My Father, ” I FOUND A SOLACE IN NURSING A PERVASIVE SENSE OF GRIEVANCE AND ANIMOSITY AGAINST MY MOTHER’S RACE”. (Except for claiming to be able to be “The Great Uniter” when stumping for President).
From ‘Dreams of my Father’, “The emotion between the races could never be pure….. the other race would always remain just that: menacing, alien, and apart.” (Except for claiming to be able to be “The Great Uniter” when stumping for President).
From ‘Dreams of My Father’,
“I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites” (Except for shouting “Hey - My Mommy was white” when he’s in Kansas stumping to be President).
From Dreams Of My Father, “never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself..”. (Except for weak JFK impersonations and saying he wants to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens when he stumps to be President).
From Dreams Of My Father:
“That hate hadn’t gone away,” he wrote, blaming “white people — some cruel, some ignorant, sometimes a single face, sometimes just a faceless image of a system claiming power over our lives.” (Except for claiming to be able to be “The Great Uniter” when stumping for President).
Imagine if Hillary Rodham Clinton had written a book stating:
“I FOUND A SOLACE IN NURSING A PERVASIVE SENSE OF GRIEVANCE AND ANIMOSITY AGAINST THE BLACK RACE”.
“The emotion between the races could never be pure….. the BLACK race would always remain just that: menacing, alien, and apart.”
“never emulate BLACK men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the WHITE MAN,- SON OF AMERICA,-that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself..”.
A WHITE CANDIDATE WOULD BE CRUCIFIED FOR PRINTING COMMENTS LIKE THOSE IN BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA’S CRAPPY RACIST AUTOBIOGRAPHIES, WHICH HE HAS CAREFULLY SCRUBBED CLEAN REGARDING HIS MANY YEARS OF CORRUPTION WITH CHICAGO’S DALEY MACHINE.
I went to YouTube to look up his speeches to La Raza (Mexican militant support group for illegal aliens) and heard for myself his pandering to the illegals. Go to YouTube and listen to his speeches. Type in Barack Obama, La Raza, illegal aliens and hear him yourself).
Mike,
Are you voting for Hillary?
Why is it important in this context, who anyone votes for?
Mike spent what time it took and no money doing what Rethugs will spend a great deal of time and money doing.
It is illuminating, that I have not seen the Hillary top 5 for my “shot in the arm” or a similar list for Hillary.
Oh well, I guess 60 million (never mind private “contibutions”) was not enough to spend in vetting someone.
Thank you for ushering in a 3rd Bush term, puritans.
Mudkitty very rude. I think Mike is trying to point out the corruption that is truly Obama. We know NOTHING about this guy. The feverish pitch of his supporters borders on cultism. Cult members NEVER bother to investigate their leaders and end up getting SCREWED in the end. Remember Jim Jones - Guyana?
Mike is merely quoting what Obama wrote already. You should be taking this up with Obama, not blaming Mike for printing what is already published. Why hide from the truth? Those words are Obama’s words not Mike’s words.
Hope,
Cultism again? ROFL! This is becoming childish.
Cee it is just my perception.
I wasn’t referring to Mike’s comment.
Mudkitty -
This country was founded on a Puritan work ethic. Keep the corruption in Chi-town, please!
Excuse me?
From the nature of your posts I didn’t think that you were aware of the concept.
This sounds so incendiary maybe it shouldn’t be posted, but it has been on my mind all day. Larry: feel free to delete.
Earlier I had commented about the Obama campaign theme/slogan “now is our time.” What keeps coming up in my head is the phrase “time to cut down the tall trees” which was used to start the conflict in Rwanda between the Tutsies and Hutus. I am not comparing a political campaign to genocide, there’s just something about the tone of that phrase that keeps reminding me of that movie. Ok, I have gotten that off my chest and made myself feel a little crazier in the process.
I’m glad this wasn’t deleted.
I’ve noticed that Mike doesn’t say that he plans to vote for Hillary. Ashamed to be a Hillary surrogate who is doing to GOP’s wet work, Mike?
doing THE GOP’s
Vee,
Seeing how it’s Obama’s Muslim cousin in Kenya who started the lethal violence over what he believed to be an unfair election result, you may be right.
Joel Stein, an Obama supporter feeling creeped out by other Obama supporters wrote these words in the LA Times:
“What the Cult of Obama doesn’t realize is that he’s a politician. Not a brave one taking risky positions like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich, but a mainstream one. He has not been firing up the Senate with stirring Cross-of-Gold-type speeches to end the war. He’s a politician so soft and safe, Oprah likes him.
There’s talk about his charisma and good looks, but I know a nerd when I see one. The dude is Urkel with a better tailor.
My mom, a passionate Hillary Clinton supporter, immediately attacked Obamamania. “Some part of me wants to say, ‘People wake up. He has no plans.’ I get frustrated listening to his speeches after awhile,” she said.
I started to feel a little more grounded again. Did I want to be some dreamer hippie loser, or a person who understands that change emerges from hard work and conflict?
“People are projecting an awful lot onto him,” Mom said. “Almost like what was that movie with, oh, the movie, oh God. That English actor, he practically said nothing. Oh shoot. He was the butler and everybody loved him and what he was thinking and feeling. Do you know the movie I’m talking about? You don’t.” Hers, of course, is the demographic most likely to vote.
But she’s right. Obama is Peter Sellers in “Being There.” As a therapist, she’s seen the danger of ungrounded expectations. “You feel young again. You feel like everything is possible. He helps you feel that way and you want to feel that way; it’s a great marriage. Unfortunately, the divorce will happen very quickly.”
Mike,
Did Obama ever recant any of those excerpts from his book? I don’t want to buy it and add any more money to his pocket.
Vee,
Not only has Barack Hussein Obama never recanted those things, he wrote them knowing that he wanted to be President. He wrote these books in an attempt to cash-in on his new found popularity as a new Senator and after his Democratic convention speech, so they aren’t old.
Michelle Obama immediately began soliciting “corporate experience” that is Board of Director seats as soon as Barack Hussein Obama became a Senator. And she got appointments with some really crappy corporations even though the Obamas still delight in talking about Hillary Rodham Clinton and Wal-Mart nearly 20 years ago.
By the way, ABC had a video that at first was titled “Hillary Clinton failed to stand up to Wal-Mart over Unions”. I watched the video, which may still be on the site. I was amazed that the video actually showed Sam Walton talking about how they recently put a very bright strong-willed lady on the Board, who said she was going to see to it that they gave women better jobs and that they should provide health care!
Picture Barack Hussein Obama saying that to Michelle Obama’s Treehouse CEO…!
Most interesting, ABC later changed the title of the video to “Hillary Clinton and Wal-Mart”.
I’m not holding my breath for the “Michelle Obama Corporate Whore” video since the media seems to either be lying in wait until after the convention or nomination and/or Rezko trial/ or future indictments start.
MSNBC makes me long for the days of the Fairness Doctrine.
I’m not holding my breath for the “Michelle Obama Corporate Whore
Has anyone on this blog ever called Hillary a whore?
Where is the outrage from all of you idignant people who scream about sexism?
Mike,
You need anger management.
No, she’s not.
I save that term for Bill’s girlfriends.
Whether that term applies to them depends upon whether they expected or accepted payment for their services.
Hillary the Movie …the ammo was free for the taking in Iraq. I would never dream of giving Republicans mine. It appears they have tons of it. Blackwater has the largest domestic stockpile in the USA.
Oops I need to be careful what I say.
TWK said:
I ask this very seriously, do you think our military, our federal law enforcement would stand down to Blackwater, genuinely allow them to become a threat?
Just in terms of not knowing what they were up to, their strengths, weaknesses, business partners, banks, profiles, employees, codes, do you think that is plausible?
So many things function on so many levels, like the orange crush, say…
Merger’s and acquisitions. The government structures are at a point of disarray and the revolving door has been going on along time. It is not a “direct confrontation” in a militant sense. Ask your self why Blackwater was in New Orleans. and is running border Ops across the Mexican US border, Domestic spying, Blackwater is not alone. Ask what part of government has not been outsourced as a consequence of “government is bad” for 30 years. Not one institution of government is functional , except those that are “state secrets.” The guard is non functional in responding to a domestic disaster, and who will “us” turn to? Addington is reported as saying we are one bomb away from getting rid of FISA. What else have they gotton rid of besides the constitution, evidence, the law, etc. All tin hat shit aside hard to see the grass grow as slow as it does.
If the truth fits…
Cee your comments are far too personal.
Then ignore me.
Best idea you’ve had!
I just now saw his comment and I also believe it crosses the line. I reject sexism no matter who it is directed at, no matter where it comes from.
You can’t handle the truth!
You were on such a roll Mike, dam craps table.
I reject sexism no matter who it is directed at, no matter where it comes from. Agreed, corporate or otherwise.
How is being a corporate whore sexist? Look up words in dictionaries if you don’t understand them folks.
Now don’t take a wide stance with me MR.
The fact is at first Michelle Obama went to obtain conections starting in Mayor Daileys office via an aquiantance/friend. After all that time spent clinmbing up the “corporate ladder” , can you imagine what sacrifices she has made? 51k in a single day, when her own husband traded her job away for a “one liner” attempting to gather Union support when Obama says he won’t shop at Walmart.
Ring Ring… hey Michelle (Obama) I just told Union members I won’t shop at Walmart.
Michelle: Fine, don’t then…Good for you!
Obama: Yea, but how would it look when I run for President and I need Union support, with you on that Nut Tree board? I can’t use Hillary’s WalMart thing against her;You have to resign.
Michelle: (W)TF you say!! I was planning on using that money for the down payment on our new house you ______ (insert what wives call their husbands when learning of a spouses “dumb” move.)
Obama: I guess that means I can’t go out and play with my friends tonight?
Michelle: Hell NO! You’re _______( insert anatomical part and its color) is grounded.
Michelle: The only place you’re shopping from now on is on the Home shopping network!!
Obama: But Michelle , don’t you want to be the first lady?
Michelle: I WANT that house.
Obama: 1600?
click..
Obama: Michelle? Michelle?
[...] what we need. Another fucking politician with a goddamn Messiah complex. [ Obama, You Ain’t NEO [...]
I was thinking, (yawn)thudfactor, oh, who gives a shit what another Obamabot thinks, posting ancient bait? It’s never original, anyway, seems the same old ring around the blogs, same people, putting up wall paper, like a tagger, say, trying to obfuscate, like Keith Haring painting on the streets of New York ( Was that too confusing? An arcane reference? Too stream of consciousness? People DO know who Keith Haring is, right, they understand the metaphor?)
My goodness, willfully ignoring Auchi, and his connections, Auchi even serving on the board of the Kennedy School of Government, at Harvard, well, shouldn’t it, at the very least, be looked into?
I remember an artist painting the sidewalks on the upper westside… It was wonderful when it rained.
Oh, NOT Keith Haring, it could have been any tagger, but not Haring.
Haring’s paintings are beautiful, I have never seen a modern eye, a young eye, honor the mother and child, post modern madonnas with child, painted with such joy, and love, RESPECT, for lack of a better word.
Haring’s paintings were to me an oasis in a world of postmodern, tech garbage dirt, techno print for the brain dead.
And his gay erotica was great, too.
That last line was meant to be ironic.
Haring painted nudes of himself, with his boyfriend.
I wouldn’t hang those on my living room wall, but, hey, to each his own…
As quoted in the Sunday Telegraph:
“Obama called hypocrite for wife’s Wal-Mart link”
By Philip Sherwell
“A little-reported business interest of Mrs Obama’s has opened her husband up to one of the criticisms that politicians fear most - the taint of hypocrisy.
Business link: Michelle Obama
She is taking a break from her main job, as a well-remunerated Chicago hospital executive, to campaign for her husband. But she has just been re-elected to the board of an Illinois food-processing company, a position she took up two years ago to gain experience of the private sector.
And the biggest customer for the pickles and peppers produced by Treehouse Foods is the retail giant Wal-Mart, the world’s largest corporation and the bête noire of American liberals, including Sen Obama, for its employment practices, most notably its refusal to recognise trade unions.
As the Illinois senator prepared to join the presidential fray late last year, he threw his weight behind the union-backed campaign against Wal-Mart. He declared that there was a “moral responsibility to stand up and fight” the company and “force them to examine their own corporate values”.
According to the couple’s tax returns, Mrs Obama earned $51,200 for her work as a non-executive director on Treehouse’s board last year, on top of the $271,618 salary she was paid as a vice-president of the University of Chicago Hospitals.
She also received $72,375 in Treehouse stock options, as she did the previous year, when she banked a $45,000 salary from the company.
“Defending Treehouse while attacking Wal-Mart is a blatant example of personal hypocrisy.”
Sen Obama’s campaign team and Mrs Obama’s spokesman did not respond to requests by The Sunday Telegraph for comment. But the senator previously told Crain’s Chicago Business magazine that, while his views on corporate reform and social justice remained the same regardless of what happens at Treehouse, “Michelle and I have to live in the world and pay taxes and pay for our kids and save for retirement”.
Hillary Clinton, Sen Obama’s main rival for the Democratic nomination, can testify to the political dangers in liberal America of being associated with Wal-Mart, even though the company’s cost-cutting policy makes its goods more affordable for the low-paid.
The New York senator and wife of the former President Bill Clinton still encounters flak for serving on the company’s board from 1985 to 1992, before becoming First Lady.
According to Treehouse’s financial filings, Wal-Mart accounted for 16.1 per cent of its sales last year, up from 11.7 per cent in 2005 (a 37 per cent increase), comfortably making it the company’s biggest customer. Treehouse’s annual operating profits rose from $28 million two years ago to $84 million (up 200 per cent) in 2006.
Mrs Obama, 43, was re-elected to the board last month for a further three years, a period that would overlap with her husband’s time in the White House if he becomes America’s first black president.
Mrs Obama is Treehouse’s senior non-executive director and sits on the company’s audit and nominating and corporate governance committees. Her Treehouse connection is not the only awkward ethical question that has confronted Sen Obama as his past is dug over.
Earlier this year, in response to a newspaper investigation, he said he was unaware that his broker had bought $50,000 worth of stock in two speculative companies whose leading investors included some of his biggest political donors.
He has also apologised for his “boneheaded error” in striking a property deal with Tony Rezko, a Chicago Democrat operative facing a federal indictment.
Obama is getting away with this lack of scrutiny of this because of his skin color. Look how former President Clinton was smeared for looking at Obama’s war votes. We are so screwed. I hate making comments like these. It makes me feel like I am devolving into something I have always stood against. It is true though.
Lack of scrutiny? What a crock!
Gee Cee,
Why don’t you show me that Michelle Obama isn’t a corporate whore? She solicited corporate experience and she found it. AND SHE LOVES IT!
Mike,
We’ll discuss this after you tell me who you’re voting for.
Can’t answer the question - can you?
Mike,
You’re a loud talkin’ coward.
Gee Cee -
Still can’t answer the question - can you?
From the Chicago Tribune 4/2007 - Shortly before Michelle Obama resigned from Treehouse:
Just after Barack Obama entered the U.S. Senate, for instance, his wife was offered a position on the board of TreeHouse Foods, a Westchester-based maker of specialty foods.
In 2006, the company paid her $51,200 for her board activities, according to the Obamas’ just-filed federal income tax return. Factoring in stock options and other payments, the value of her compensation package for serving on the TreeHouse board last year was $101,083, a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission shows.
TreeHouse packages pickles and other private-label foods for retailers. By far its largest customer is Wal-Mart. Barack Obama has been sharply critical of Wal-Mart’s business and labor practices — criticizing the giant retailer last fall for paying low wages and poor benefits while making big profits.
Obama was promoted to vice president for community and external affairs in March 2005, two months after her husband took office in the U.S. Senate. The promotion more than doubled her salary from the hospital.
Michelle Obama is a vice president of The University of Chicago Medical Center, where one of her signature responsibilities is guiding low-income patients away from the emergency room and into primary care elsewhere. Barack Obama’s union supporters have been critical of the management of many large hospitals for how they deal with charity care for the poor.
UPDATE
Obama–>Rezko–>Auchi–>Saddam Hussein & Muammar al-Gaddafi
EXCUSE ME:
Obama got his money from Rezko who got his 3.5 million from Auchi:
Where’s the media?
-Nadhmi Auchi is an Iraqi-born billionaire who was charged along with Saddam Hussein for conspiring to assassinate Prime minister (president) Abdul Karim Qasim and stood trial in 1959. (Auchi gave fellow Baath Party members machine guns from his home for Saddam Hussein.)
-Auchi protected secret money for Saddam Hussein AND Muammar al-Gaddafi.
(Remember, Obama’s Trinity church Pastor Wright went with Nation of Islam minister Louis Farrakhan in 1993 to visit Libyan socialist leader Gadaffi.)
-Auchi also financially backed Saddam Hussein’s plan for a pipeline from Iraq to Saudi Arabia.
-Rezko was also a business partner with Nation of Islam Founder’s son: Jabir Herbert Muhammad.
-Rezko described his friendship with Auchi as “close”
Why isn’t the media talking about all of Barack Obama’s scary friends who have ties to the worst people in history?
*Don’t forget William (Bill) Ayers and Bernadine Dorhn of the Weather Underground.
*Obama’s cousin Raila Odinga who just became co-President of Kenya this week (after 1,000 people were killed on fire and macheted) whom Obama is said to be close to (BBC–Obama calls Odinga up to three times a day) Odinga signed a secret pact with Muslim jihadists who were to ethnically cleanse people?
And why does Raila Odinga use Obama’s exact same campaign slogan: CHANGE….Vote for CHANGE: Look at his website:
http://www.raila07.com/
___________________________________________
Thank you for your post. I’m interested in this. I’ve been digging deep online and I’ve found some startling Obama connections, but you just added a few things to my list. Especially the Odinga–Muammar al-Gaddafi connection. That makes three separate (apparently NOT separate) connections of Obama and Gaddafi.
1. Obama $–>Rezko $–>Auchi. Auchi held big funds for Saddam Hussein and also *Gaddafi.*
2. Obama’s Pastor Wright, along with Farrakhan, went to visit with Gaddafi in Libya in ‘93.
3. Obama’s Kenyan cousin Odinga receiving financial support from Libya–from Gaddafi, and knowing Sheikh Abdukeder Albakari (oil).
***Listen, go back and read my post on these same issues. Go use my leads and dig and I’ll use yours and dig.
**I have no clue what all this *really* means. I know in 2004, Obama’s political opponent Republican Alan Keys of Chicago accused Obama of being a “hard-core academic Marxist.” Obama admitted going to socialist conferences. Frank Marshall Davis–friend, member of Communist Party (Cpusa). Also, Pastor Wright of Trinity church often gives “sermons” on politics (laced with expletives, btw) specifically getting rid of the middle-class, and he blames capitalism for the world’s ills–well, black man’s ills. Obama is friends with Weather Underground American-born terrorists from the 1960’s, and they are socialists. Gue Chevara’s face on Cuban flags at his offical campaign headquarters in Texas. Gaddafi…of course, Libyan socialist leader who believes in pan-Arabism….the coming together of all Arab countries and all Arab people globally. OT: I wonder if his athiest mother also had some interesting political ideas.
–See, I don’t know what to think about this. What does it mean?? If Obama wins (he won’t, he basically only wins red states), what the heck does this mean? What could happen to America?
–Don’t forget Karl Marx…don’t forget Gaddafi’s hope of the revolution of the proletariats to rise up. Who, in this case, would be the proletariat?
Change, eh? Change indeed.
ALLLL I am saying is: It’s weird.
(I won’t talk about it on the boards too much, these bozos still think he’s just a super duper cool black man for President.)
[...] April 1925, by Mayor Walter Sims, who committed the city to make an airfield. Usefull Posts Obama, You Ain’t NEO : NO QUARTER…Britney Spears: Circus video and Circus concert tour | Celebrity Gossip… « Kansas [...]