More on Obama’s Answer About Justice Clarence Thomas
By SusanUnPC on August 17, 2008 at 8:55 PM in Barack Obama, Qualifications, Supreme Court
As thunder pounds the skies and shakes the earth here — basso continuo, like tympani drums as gargantuan as the mountains, with a deep, unholy timbre that is frightening and foreboding, so much so that friends’ dogs are hiding under their beds — I talked to a friend who told me to check out this story at Hot Air:
“Nuance: Obama almost says Clarence Thomas didn’t have enough experience to serve”
And we know what horrible outcomes can arise when people without experience are placed in positions of great power. InstaGlenn accuses him of actually saying it but that’s not true: Watch him catch himself mid-sentence, the first fateful syllable of the word “experience” already out of his mouth, before he stops short and switches gears by basically calling Thomas a moron instead (at least, “at the time”) — an aspersion reinforced a moment later by the implicit contrast he draws in praising Scalia’s brilliance. A golden gaffe, narrowly avoided. Stay classy, Barry.
What is the worst of this is, as we all know here and have grown weary of trying to explain to others, is that Obama nearly expressed his OWN greatest weakness: His own lack of experience. Here’s the video:
You had better watch it, Barack. What you’re really saying that it is YOU who don’t have the experience — particularly in the inept ways you answered too many questions last night. And you KNEW it, which is why you stopped yourself suddenly. YOU KNOW IT TOO, don’t you. Not good.
As Taylor Marsh said, he needs a debate coach badly. But as I also said last night, no coach in the world can provide him with the one thing he does not have: Experience.
It was a significant — but foreboding — contribution to our discussion that, this morning, Reverend Amy mentioned that scolding letter that a betrayed John McCain sent in 2006 to the impudent, neophyte senator Barack Obama who did not know his place and did not even know enough to feign respect not only for his more senior fellow senators but also for the institution. Here is the opening salvo of that letter, which Reverend Amy reprints in full:
I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere. When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership’s preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter to me dated February 2, 2006, which explained your decision to withdraw from our bipartisan discussions. I’m embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in politics to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble. Again, sorry for the confusion, but please be assured I won’t make the same mistake again.
The experienced man lectures the young, immature senator that a man’s word IS HIS BOND.
What is shocking is that the experienced man had to give the lecture at all. Surely, one can almost certainly assume, that a man who has achieved the rare distinction of becoming a United States Senator would have learned that lesson long ago. Apparently not.
After all, as his supporters have learned — over and over and over again — in the past couple months, Barack Obama holds NO value, NO policy, and NO commitment dear enough that he isn’t willing, in a heartbeat, to toss it away like cheap garbage if it suddenly doesn’t suit his immediate overwhelming need for self-gratification.
The man is still a junkie. But his drug of choice these days is adoration. The masses must worship him. That is why a simple convention venue is not enough. There must be a stadium large enough to fit his ego.
NancyA called me this afternoon and asked me why the Democrats let themselves be transfixed by this wholly inadequately prepared candidate. There is NO rational explanation.
By thanks to their failure to conduct “due diligence” of this candidate, the Democrats are doomed to either an unnecessary, utterly preventable loss in November — in the one year they could seize victory firmly in their grasp — or to four grim years of a presidency by a unprepared, unschooled, inexperienced, unqualified man.
Historians will write about this for centuries to come.
It is tragic that we who are alive at this moment in time could not prevent this from having happened.
But our fate, and the party’s fate, has been seized and no one with any sense is listening.
The thunder rumbles. The lightning flashes. The sky is ominously dark and looming over all of us. But those who should know better are too dazzled by the power trip they’re on to stop and think about the imminent danger.
, the basis for the Best Motion Picture Nominee (Golden Globes) starring Brad Pitt.
, the novel by John Le Carre, a new motion picture starring Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.
by 
* (Included in the 
* 
.by David Fredosso who wrote 2008's 
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
