RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

  1. *** Well, folks…. this is what you get when a political party is built on a foundation of identity politics and victimization.  Eventually they will turn on each other.***

    Or, liberalism creates the exact opposite of it’s stated intent.  Or, liberals are a bunch of idiot hypocrites.  Any way you slice it, they lose.

    Comment by LesbianNeoCon — March 19, 2008 @ 7:57 am - March 19, 2008

  2. "The chickens have come home to roost." (Thanks Jeremiah, for making your profound contribution to the great national liberal pie in the sky dialogue. Let the infighting begin and may you have the audacity of hope to come out of it unscathed.)

    Comment by heliotrope — March 19, 2008 @ 9:41 am - March 19, 2008

  3. This has been an amazing election cycle, that’s for sure.  About a month ago I thought that Obama would easily get the nomination and had a better chance than McCain to win the November election.  Now I really have no idea.  The Democrats seemed to be determined to tear themselves apart and remembering the old military maxim, when one’s enemy is set upon such a course get out of the way and let them go to it.  I never though I’d be cheering Hillary on, but the shenanigans of the Clintons are finally apparent to Democrats now as they watch their chances this year go up in smoke.  The anger and bitterness among partisans for both Dems is astonishing to witness.  Just take a look at this article from Newsweek:

    I confess that after years of the asinine rhetoric and lies from the Dems, I am taking some pleasure from this.  I’d like to see the Religious Right face a similar debacle as their own chickens come home to roost, but that will have to wait for now.  There still remains a possibility for either Obama or Clinton in the fall, but I’m not sure I can see how they can pull out a victory.  Their party is deeply divided, they are both spending their war chests fighting each other and whomever wins the nomination will leave the other half of their party bitterly disappointed.  The winner of the nomination fight will come out weakened and low on cash with McCain ready to face them head on.  He is definitely not the ideal candidate but one thing this intra-party spat is showing to the voters is that he’s certainly better than either of these two.  Eh, there a still a few more months to watch this all unfold so we shall see…

    Comment by John — March 19, 2008 @ 10:38 am - March 19, 2008

  4. As I keep saying: We now know that Barack Obama is a racist.  (Follow the link to see my justification for saying so.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 19, 2008 @ 10:51 am - March 19, 2008

  5. I keep wondering how the intend to "unite" the country if they can’t even unite themselves. Or maybe they mean untie the country?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 19, 2008 @ 10:52 am - March 19, 2008

  6. John, agree.  McCain is looking like a shoo-in, at the moment.  Hillary will get closer to Obama’s total (I predict) in popular vote, but not in delegates.  Still, she’s a Clinton and she knows that if she torpedoes him with the right argument, controversy or scandal, she regains Presidential power.  So, she won’t let go.  Meanwhile, Obama, the Dem race’s leader, is indeed vulnerable on many grounds.

    If trends continue, Americans will be heartily sick of both of them, by the time Democrats have their late convention.  "If trends continue" – That’s always the rub.  New events and trends will always happen.  We’ll see.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 19, 2008 @ 10:57 am - March 19, 2008

  7. The dems started the process a full six months ("debates") early and the whole boring active primary campaigning nine months earlier than in past presidential elections. The Republicans got dragged into the new, extended silliness because they risked being irrelevant if they didn’t make themselves known as well.

    The late dem convention was to be a coronation. Now it likely to be a free-for-all from which the battered victor will stagger forth begging for support from the irritated factions. The parallel with the Jacobeans in the French Revolution is astounding. There is going to be a great blood letting.

     I notice Hillary has turned on the KOS kids. Oh, my. She doesn’t do well with head lice, fleas and bedbugs? Hey, saprophytes have to eat too!

    I suspect that the Clintons cooked this nightmare up by calculating they could wear out all the competition in the fund raising theater. Now we are witnessing the train wreck their miscalculations have led to. Oh, my!

    Comment by heliotrope — March 19, 2008 @ 12:24 pm - March 19, 2008

  8. I think LesbianNeoCon hit the nail on the head, it’s the nature of Identity Politics to be as divisive as an id-driven child, and about as well informed.

    Comment by DirtCrashr — March 19, 2008 @ 12:46 pm - March 19, 2008

  9. Michelle Malkin catches Obama double-talking:

    On Friday, Obama attempted to minimize the extent to which he had been exposed to Wright’s poisonous politicking on the pulpit. “None of these statement were ones that I had heard myself personally in the pews,” he told Major Garrett of Fox News…

    Yesterday, Obama changed his tune: “…Did I ever hear [Wright] make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.”

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 19, 2008 @ 2:28 pm - March 19, 2008

  10. racism: n. 2. belief in racial superiority: the belief that people of different races have different qualities and abilities, and that some races are inherently superior or inferior.

    Doesn’t this define liberalism? That black people can’t make it on their own and need the help of benevolent white liberals in order to succeed?

    Comment by American Elephant — March 19, 2008 @ 2:47 pm - March 19, 2008

  11. Brian Ross of ABC noticed the same thing as MM:
    In Speech, Obama Contradicted More Than a Year of Denials About His Knowledge of Rev. Wright’s Sermons.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 19, 2008 @ 3:50 pm - March 19, 2008

  12. The prominent liberal gay blog Bilerico Project writes:

    In explaining his relations to the media about Wright, Obama described him as a crazed uncle we all have in our family. And in his address Obama stated that he "can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother."

    However, I beg to differ.

    There is a distinct difference between the biological family you are born into and the church family you choose to worship with.

    And so too is there a distinct difference between telling the truth to the American public and telling us a lie.

    If Obama can throw his pastor under the bus, what will he do to LGBTQ voters on his way to the White House?

    Mickey Kaus from Slate is very troubled by Obama’s speech:

    Obama’s explanations of black anger seem intimate and respectful. His explanations of white anger seem distant and condescending.

    Comment by John — March 19, 2008 @ 4:39 pm - March 19, 2008

  13. Malkin’s point was parsed by Bob Beckal on Hannity last hour. He used the typical "meaning of ‘is is’" stuff. Obama didn’t hear the specific stuff on the tapes, but he did hear some unidentified stuff that he can agree that some people might find controversial. Blah, blah, blah.

    Here is the Beckal conclusion: Bob Jones University is so vile that if a Republican walks across the grass there, it is no different than sitting in a pew listening to Wright for 20 years, calling him your mentor and taking his advisory help. What, pray tell, would be the consequences of shaking hands with Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson?

    Jeremiah Wright for commissioner of the Fairness Doctrine!!! (Bob Beckal who never managed a campaign he could win, should be Wright’s outreach director.)

    Comment by heliotrope — March 19, 2008 @ 5:04 pm - March 19, 2008

  14. A couple more great (I think) reactions / analyses of Obama’s speech.

    Michael Medved’s.Freaky, right after reading Medved’s column, I checked our spam filter and found & approved this comment. –Dan

    Robert Tracinski’s. Tracinski, in particular, takes awhile to get to the point… but then nails it:

    Racial politics, he argues, has to be subordinated to the larger goal of moving America toward socialism.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 19, 2008 @ 6:57 pm - March 19, 2008

  15. Somebody over at The Corner remarked that Orgasma was blaming whites for not understanding black anger enough.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 20, 2008 @ 12:28 am - March 20, 2008

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**

Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.180 Powered by Wordpress