He’s a liberal who favors increased federal spending and a larger federal government, has been less than and candid about past associations, refuses to disclose a number of details about his past. He has switched positions on a number of key issues.
Seems to underestimate the threats abroad while downplaying the success of our strategy in Iraq. He talks a good game about postpartisanship and a “new kind of politics,” but since elected to public office, he has failed to accomplish any significant reform. He has never bucked his party on any major issues. Indeed, he consistently votes the party line. While campaigning for change, he doesn’t have much of a record as a trend-setter. He’s more a follower than a leader.
UPDATE:Â And here’s another, Paul Mirengoff of Powerline “considers Barack Obama’s radical associations [,] .. . . . asking whether these associations portend a radical presidency if Obama is elected.”
Excellent nutshell. How I wish we could all be that succinct! (pointing the finger at myself first.)
I’m with Mark Steyn:
Of course, I was saying this in February but welcome to the party, Mark.
Who ever thought we’d live to see the day when the most conservative leader in the Free World was the President of France? Strange days indeed.
Very good nutshell. However, I am outraged over the outrage over a few people that have made some bad comments at McCain and Palin rallies about Obama. Has Obama condemned Madonna for comparing McCain to Hitler? The list of people such as her in the “entertainment industry” are nearly endless. The one industry that is going to come an end very soon will be the Bush/Cheney Hate Industry. I thought that the Clinton Hate Industry was bad …. but, the Bush/Cheney Hate Industry is worse
nice synopsis. Hope to share something similar with a liberal soon!
Come on now, Dan… I know what the real reason is.
Look – even Fidel Castro can see right through my transparent racism.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081012/D93ON3T00.html
Opposing socialism is racist.
Castro, yikes. The poor man took power around 1959 and rules Cuba to this day. Perhaps Obama can get Castro to run a TV ad for him.
Great nutshell, Dan. You might add, instead of “Country First”, Obama’s slogan might be “Me First.”
Of course, in that regard, he really is a typical politician. We sure are long on THOSE these days – eh?
Excellent nutshell, Dan. I might add that, rather than having the slogan “Country First”, Obama could adopt: “Me First.”
Of course, in that regard, he really is the typical politcian…. We sure are long on those!
You nailed it! The two big things are bigger gubbement and more partisanship. We don’t need either of those if we are going to solve the problems we have.
You suffer from cognitive dissonance. A gay man supporting the republiKKKans is like a jew supporting Hitler or a black man thinking slavery was wonderful. I pity you and your self-hatred.
Do you want to back up your insult with some evidence, Jay. Or, are you so narrow as to understand what Republicans stand for. You’d rather hurl insults than engage us.
Ah yes,
According to liberals like Jay, valuing the institution of marriage and the function it performs for society (something Jay has probably never even bothered to consider) is akin to slaughtering Jews and enslaving blacks.
Funny you should bring up slavery Jay, because you are enslaved by ignorance.
We are free here, Jay. Free to live our lives as we see fit with whomever we see fit. Free thinkers. We lack your insecurities and phony victimhood.
Now, git along back to the Victocrat plantation where people actually believe your crap.
Thanks for this Obama summary. Thanks actually for your entire blog — I’ve just discovered it. I’ve been a Democrat since Clinton ’92 but am voting McCain this year because … well … your nutshell commentary sums it up.
I’m embarrassed to say that I was sucked in by liberal friends in the arts back in ’91 when I went off to a music conservatory. Being a musician who spends more of her time at a piano than in a history book, I didn’t even know what I was voting for except “gay rights” and “women’s rights.”
Obama has indeed “saved” me, because after he and the DNC spit on Clinton, I decided to open a book: “The Forgotten Man” by Amity Shlaes. This before the Bailout, even. I have opened other books since then and come to realize I am more conservative than I thought. In fact, I am not a liberal at all, unless one considers equal rights “liberal.” I looked further into abortion even and while I am pro-choice, I would not lay down my life for the right, whereas I would lay down my life for preventing a communist takeover of the United States.
I compared the speech rosters of the DNCC and the RNCC and found that the RNCC included more female speakers who had actually *done* something (Fiorina, Whitman) versus the DNCC which had the daughter of a civil rights activist and the granddaughter of a former President. Which Convention would I take my ambitious nieces to? Hardly worth thinking about.
So thank you for this blog. This week alone I have been called a racist by two “friends” for not voting for Obama. I am surrounded by a particularly close-minded menagerie of liberal artistic friends up here in the northeast who cannot understand why a gay girl like me won’t vote for their Savior. At least until after the election, I will have fewer dinner parties and more dates with a book on the couch.
Why I’m not supporting Obama – he’s not concerned with fiscally responsible government. He’ll raise taxes to match his increased govt spending.
Why I’m not supporting McCain – pretty much the same, except he will raise the national debt to keep up with spending.
A gay man supporting the republiKKKans is like a jew supporting Hitler or a black man thinking slavery was wonderful. I pity you and your self-hatred.
Perhaps we should support the party of slavery and anti-Semitism like you?
Hey, Jay Stewart, DailyKos called. They need to use the idiotic rhetorical cliche and want to know if you’re done with it.
What party’s members started a treasonous war to start their own country where black people could be treated like property? The Democrats.
Which party were almost all KKK members a member of? The Democrats.
What party supported Jim Crow laws? The Democrats.
What party did a President who put a Klansman on the Supreme Court belong to? The Democrats.
What party does Grand Kleagle Robert Byrd belong to? The Democrats.
And if 90% black support of this party is NOT cognitive dissonance, I don’t know what is?
#17: Oh, come now, Attmay. That’s really not fair. The Democratic Party has come a long way since the days of slavery and Jim Crow laws. Joe Biden is on the record courageously noting that his running mate is “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean.” Now, you have to admit that’s progress.
#11: “I pity you and your self-hatred.”
Right back at cha, Jay.
Dan, Thanks for the succinct talking points. I’ll be watching the final debate with a bunch of liberals. I’m not expecting much from the debate, but I’ll be repeating your points to them as to why I can’t vote for the ‘new guy’.
Meanwhile, my nephew is in town – he works for Chucky Schumer, he was trying to explain to my son (who used to work at Indy Mac) that Schumer never intended to have his letter leaked, and really, it’s all someone elses’ fault.
Leah, that reminds me. Harry Reid never intended to mention that two huge insurance companies either, which sent the market tumbling. I suppose Reid never meant for that information to get out either… it was someone else’s fault… even though he said it himself.
This is awesome!
Sorry… I meant to add… I look forward to more bloggers and conservatives coming out with their reasons why we are not supporting him…. I am still waiting for reasons to support him other than inspirational rhetoric and still come up empty.
My opposition to McCain: no honor.
Given that you support Obama, jimmy, who gives millions of dollars to public schools to teach black racist beliefs and revisionist history from education professors who wish they had done more firebombing, murdering, and attacking of policemen, civilians, and US soldiers, it’s no surprise that you would find McCain to have “no honor”.
After all, if he were an honorable man like Obama, he would support firebombing houses and calling white children “pigs” like Obama does.
The opposition to Obama resembles the picture of the solar system before the formation of the planets: an immense amount of material without a coherent nucleus or a center of gravity around which to crystallize. Obama was elected on the strength of vague, content-poor slogans because his media persona, exploited perfectly by Oprah Winfrey, taught him that most Americans are not interested in substance but will be satisfied with the vacuous fluff that fills the media to which they are glued. Now that he is in office, however, the vacuousness is coming home to roost, and like the cunning falcon that he is, he realizes that he is safest being ever in flight on Air Force One so that attention can be deflected from the content-free domestic agenda, which is wholly in the hands of his advisers, to his jet-setting capital hopping. He also believes that he can make history solely by virtue of his narcissistic conception of who he is: Thus, he thinks he can impose peace on Israelis and Arabs simply because of the “assets” (which are what?) that he pompously believes that he brings to the table. At bottom, his is a Presidency just waiting to crash. But the opposition to him is not taking advantage of this constellation of events. Where is the opposition figure that can articulately thrash his inherently racist, self-serving agenda? Why were McCain and Palin the best that could be put forth? If the next three and a half years of his pro-Islamist, racism-rousing, histrionic self-adulation and planned destruction of the United States to fit the agenda of his South Chicago base are not to be followed by another four, opposition has to move from complaint to constructive fielding of a viable opposition candidate.