This is the easiest test that a presidential candidate must pass. When only about 30 of Americans thinks that a candidate is very patriotic, that candidate is in trouble. We might not see it because we are still in midst of the Democratic primaries, but this could be serious troubles in the general.

I am a democrat and have been for decades now, but i don’t think that Senator Obama can win with these numbers.

In another CBS/NYT poll (the most recent), the pollsters asked about the political influence of Reverend Wright on Obama. Well, 11% say that he has lot of influence and 32% say that he has some political influence on Obama. That is about 44% of Americans think that he has some political influence on Obama. These numbers don’t get better when the question is asked only to the democratic primary voters; Actually the numbers worsen and 45% of democratic primary voters think that Reverend Wright has political influence on Obama.

That means that 45% of democrats and 44% of Americans think that the person who says all those horrible things–God damn America; United States KKK of America; AIDS was manufactured by the US government and then the US government knowingly infected Africans and African-Americans; Farrakhan is a great guy; made fun of the way JFK spoke; made fun of how white college bands play music and march; made fun of how Bostonians (actually Irish Bostonians like me) talk; and said that 3000 Americans deserved to die on 9/11–has POLITICAL influence of Senator Obama.

I don’t know about you, but i don’t see a winner in Senator Obama. No candidate can win the presidency if the American people think that s/he is not patriotic.

I think the Democratic party is making a serious mistake by nominating Senator Obama. He is struggling (he is actually behind by as many as 15 points in some polls) in battle ground states and must win states such as in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri and Florida against one of the weakest Republican candidate in the last 50 years (except for Bob Dole), John McCain. Senator Obama is even behind John McCain in states like New Jersey. These are troublesome numbers and stats in a time of serious economic downturn, a republican president with an approval rating in the low 30s, and a very unpopular war. We need to look in a mirror and ask ourselves a simple question: Can senator Obama win in the fall? My most honest answer is that he cannot. Not with these numbers and not with his associations. You can accuse Senator Clinton of everything, but being unpatriotic or weak. And in order to beat the republicans our candidate cannot look like wimpy and unpatriotic.

Obama has appropriated JFK’s image, not his example.

And it was never my impression Obama was influenced by anyone more insipid and weak than Dick Cheney, since they both exhibit the same pretentious mediocrity, and corruption, the same lack of insight, lack of intellectual insight.

Both are dumber than a brick.

BTW, given it is those who fight for human rights, DIE for human rights, given they are the ones who succeed, I mean, all I see out of Cheney is FAILURE, why would it be wrong to emulate Kennedy, and King?

I mean, shouldn’t we model ourselves after winners, or is that a Republican thing, borne out of cowardice, and stupidity, to idolize big losers?

But then it explains a lot, I suppose.

BTW, from what I read, Kennedy wasn’t a huge civil rights advocate, but he was open to it, when he was assassinated.

Kennedy was empathetic, a learner, unlike this current crop of opportunistic moron we have.

Johnson was a civil rights advocate, for the right reasons, as was Clinton.

Without fail, it’s the men, and women who are willing to fight the good moral fight, who are willing to DIE for the human rights of others, who win.

Look at WW2.

Why did this country succeed the way it did?

The losers abuse, without fail, and are too stunted intellectually and psychologically to understand why…

Hence, the perpetual cycle of failure, until their system collapses.

We only see what we know, and if the President, or the mullah is thick cowardly moron, well, we get this world, as of late…

This writer I know over at Savage Politics has the whole deep story. It’s shocking. There must be so much graft post the Dems of the 70’s. I thought post Civil Rights $$$ had gone to help people in ghettos.

Now, global warmings effects will cause more Katrinas and tornadoes…will people help each other anymore?

I don’t think Obama cared about his own city when you read the Rezko stuff. Like Wright, he is only for himself. Here is that article by Lin. Scary. It’s much larger than you think. The big press won’t print her, I think she writes for HuffP, and others. She is a real journalist. She even wrote a piece on the Weatherman era over there.

http://www.savagepolitics.com

An Unholy Trinity of Hate

May 5th, 2008 Lin Farley Posted in Political Analysis |

We are in total agreement regarding “the organized religion as big business theory”.

And, for me, anyway, reflecting further, this whole group, whether it be the mullahs, say, or Cheney, like children, they always have this expectation that someone else will rescue them if things go awry, they can screw up all they want, because Mom and Dad will take care of it, just like they did for both Bush and Ayers.

Both had fathers that ALWAYS bailed them out, no matter what. SO then they go into politics, fuck with the candy store, no moral hazard, because there in no expectation of consequence, they never grew up taking responsibility, their fathers always rescued them, bailing them out. Neil Bush was part of a scheme that resulted in the Savings and Loans being bankrupted, for all practical purposes, and his Dad, and the American taxpayer, bailed him out. Bush rapes the taxpayer, and he’s sprung, just like any other spoiled rich child.

Why did we let that happen? Why is he special, he’s not.

So, now, when the archetypal “big john” fails, they expect the fairy (!) queen to walk in, and solve all their problems, making the war go away, the failed economy, better, so they can come back, and do it all over again, and no, other’s take advantage of your selfish narcissism, and hurt real defense, and security.

That’s a fantasy of the mediocre rich boy, Santa doesn’t exist, most of us know this, and take pride in preventing and solving real world problems.

Men like Ayers, Bush, Cheney, Obama, and god help us, the mullahs, don’t understnd this very basic tenet of cause and effect. They simply are not smart enough to govern in this world, they can’t even recognize their enemies.

I have also deeply appreciated your thoughful, articulate..and often beautifully expressed thoughts here…You are a Classy Lady, with
really good Insight..

Thanks for your ontributions..

VOX POPULI VOX DEI
( The Voice Of The People Is The Voice Of God )
Democracy in Principle trumps Theocracy…..No ?

This makes them easy prey for a glib and vacuous talker like Barry that they can project their fantasies onto.

I’m a big fan of your postings on this board and these latest comments are yet another example why!

We are in total agreement regarding “the organized religion as big business theory”. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not knocking anyone who regularly attends church/synagogue/mosque/wicca or whatever, this is America and we all worship as we see fit, including Senator Obama and his family.

Churches are somewhat like Unions, many are more concerned with lining their coffers with incoming funds than with the principles of Unionism/Spiritualism. The original message has been lost in the effort to become the biggest and/ or the most influential. It is always the rank-and-file members that suffer when the beast gets too big!

As for your statements regarding Black on Black crime, I have observed the several visits that Senator Obama has made to the Bay Area and I have been waiting to hear him take on this sometimes controversial subject… to no avail.
(Unless he has done so in private, perhaps during his visit to the Getty mansion?).

As a long-time Chicago resident and AA politician, the senator should certainly be qualified to speak to this issue, whether he sees it in his own city, or in places such as Oakland and Richmond. It certainly is not for people such as myself to address it, I’m a white person. However, that doesn’t mean that I’m not interested on what he might have to say on the subject. In fact, I would consider it a mark of his character if he were to tackle this issue head-on in a major policy speech. I was waiting for him to use the Philadelphia speech as an opportunity to do so, but it did not happen.

I look forward to more of your posts. As my Arkansas Daddy used to say:

God ‘willin and the crick don’t rise.