Archive for the ‘Barack Obama’ Tag

a few notes while fishin’

There seems to be a consensus that McCain has already lost. Non-Obama pundits are planning what-next scenarios, and all of it sounds ugly. [See update below.]

Dr. Helen asks, “Is it time to go John Galt?”

Do you ever wonder after dealing with all that is going on with the economy and the upcoming election if it’s getting to be time to “go John Galt”? For those of you who have never read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, the basic theme is that John Galt and his allies take actions that include withdrawing their talents, “stopping the motor of the world,” and leading the “strikers” (those who refuse to be exploited) against the “looters” (the exploiters, backed by the government).

Vodkapundit talks about “fighting words.”

If (when?) Obama is elected, by my estimation there’s an at least even chance that the newly-reconstructed FCC will reverse course and attempt to apply the New Fairness Doctrine to blogs.

If (when?) it happens, I’ll break that law. I will break it with all due malice and in full knowledge of the possible consequences. I’ll shout “Fire Obama!” in a crowded theater. And then, for the first time ever, I’ll ask for reader donations. Because I’ll going to need them, lots of them, to pay for the lawyers.

Primordial Slack declares “Obama will not be my President” and links a number of others with similar views.

I join VodkaPundit, DailyPundit, GuyK, Dogette, and a host of others who will, at the last, refuse to sit idly by while Freedom erodes.

Put my name on your list, Communist Nanny-Staters, it’s not too early.

Obama will not be my President. Nor will Hillary “for the common good” Clinton. Nor will anyone of any skin color or sex that embraces the deconstruction of Capitalism and Freedom as their political platform.

What’s up? What did I miss while reading dusty old documents? The blogosphere isn’t connecting with middle America and the Big Bad Media message is getting through? Duh. I don’t know the number of times I’ve read someone going on about how the MSM has dug its own grave, how it knows it won’t have any influence in the future so it’s squandering it all now to get Obama elected. Nonsense. They still buy ink (and pixels and airwaves) by the barrel*, and they still control what most of middle America reads, sees, and hears.

So what to do? Get in on it. “What?” you ask. Get in on it. We have to become the MSM, get in on the ground floor as reporters, work our way up. Get in on the fight, people. Cyberspace is important ground, but it’s not the main battlefield, it’s only one hill from which we can observe and call in artillery. We have to get down in the mud and the blood, get real ink, real video, real news all over us, and push back on the main field of battle. Win there, or lose.

Where else? Where are the other battles? Worried about all the big-government politicians? Worried about the lefty academy? Two more big battlefields. Stop whining, sign your name on the line, get elected and start leading or get a Ph.D. and start teaching.

That’s exactly how the left got where it is today, and that’s the only way that ground can be retaken.

Back to the ol’ fishin’ hole for me.

###

*Sorry for the mixed metaphor, but the alliteration should please you. Oh, sorry. I left my alliteration in the worm bucket when I came up the hill to write.

Update: The post hasn’t even been up for 10 minutes and Dana H. takes me to task in the comments over claiming the Dr. Helen post was part of the “McCain’s lost” movement. And rightly so, in all likelihood. Maybe it’s a broader, “Well, we’ve lost” attitude that I’m sensing, in the big, “our movement” way.

Update 2: Grim has picked up on the apocalyptic language as well.

There is a remarkable amount of ‘end times’ language surrounding the Obama candidacy, and as we’ve discussed, some of it is really his own fault. Obama is a scion of the Alinsky movement, and Saul Alinsky did dedicate his book on “community organizing” to Lucifer.

I hope Jim Webb is right, and I’m wrong: and it is comforting to find that there are people I respect who are Obama supporters. I know I can put some faith in them, even if I have none in the man himself. Jim Webb is out there, Phil Carter of Intel Dump, retired General Zinni — these are people I respect, whether or not we always agree and even when we rarely do. That’s comforting.

still fishin’ – but have to mock celebrities

Rachel Lucas notes Streisand, Cusack, and Penn hate McCain.  My reply:

And, I’m going to steal her image, because every time I see it it makes me laugh:

smarter than you demotivator

smarter than you demotivator

PUMA reaction to Palin pick

Riverdaughter at The Confluence opens the show with a take-down of Rebecca Traister’s article at Salon.com:

Post- electable Obama lovers, welcome to the General Election! Like it so far? Awwww…I know, I know. Grown-ups can be soooo unfair!

Because we believe that one person equals one vote, like, you know that thingy called “Democracy,” and not the “post-rational” thought of stealing votes to favor one candidates over another. By doing that, and we saw it live on national TV, the DNC coddling & vote stealing not one, but TWO DNC events makes Obama beyond “post-electable”

Well in reality, Hillary as VP wouldn’t have sat well with me at all, but to your non-news junkie, the “Hillary as VP” buzz inspired many Democrats to sigh relief if Obama were the nominee, given Hillary won 18 million votes and has 35 years of experience and will be right there holding Obama’s hand, babysitting his post-electability and cleaning up mess after mess.

There’s more, and it’s a pretty interesting read. I was unaware of the charge of vote-stealing, and I wonder what the story is on that. She has 176 comments on her post as I’m writing this, and they’re fun in their own right.

Next up, campskunk at Alegre’s Corner opens up the comments after the Palin decision and the comments are pretty straightforward.

Commenter Cal writes:

“… No, John McCain doesn’t get my vote, and neither does the coronated one. But I’d be fibbing if I didn’t admit I giggled right out loud today at McCain’s “audacity.”

Team McCain – 1
Team Obot – 0″

Commenter bmc writes:

“… I don’t give a damn about the Democratic Party anymore. I’ve been looking for a reason to vote for John McCain, and he gave me one this morning. It’s not just because she’s a woman; it’s because her personal story is compelling, and she’s the sort of woman who doesn’t just talk the talk; she walks the walk. She gave a brilliant speech, and she’s a reformer, with an 80% approval rating among the nation’s governors and her state. She’s able to work across the aisle, as McCain is, and her personal story is right out of Norman Rockwell. One son going to Iraq; her baby has downs syndrome. And, she’s very likeable. John McCain asked for my vote today. As it stands right now, he’s going to get it. I like Sarah Palin and I think this is an INSPIRED move by McCain. A stunning, stunning act of political brilliance.”

And it goes on from there, with attacks on McCain and Palin, praise for them, etc. Tons of interesting stuff.

For our third PUMA reaction, we turn to the PUMA PAC:

The Puma Movement is NOT in disarray. We are united in our goals:

1. No Obama for President
2. No more Howard or the other Architects of this FIASCO at the DNC
3. Support Good Guy Dems

Today is a tumultuous day. Don’t be afraid of a little disorder. It is inevitable — the McCain Camp just pulled a brilliant tactical move and we need to regroup. But as we do so, we must remain united.

Again, the comments are great. I don’t mean that facetiously. I really enjoy them, and I kinda sympathize with them. I have felt what they are feeling. I just felt it a decade or so ago.

There are also some new PUMA sites out there:

No We Won’t: PUMA Radio

No We Won’t

POC PUMA (People of Color PUMA)

Democrat in Exile (blogger)

PUMA Party (for all your ‘Democrats for McCain’ bumperstickers)

NObama Network (which seems to be a collection of links to PUMA groups)

welcome aboard, Sarah Palin!

best choice? I don’t know, but let’s add it up:

identity politics: female, young — if we look to Obama for youth, that gives Mrs. Palin a plus-plus; maybe pulls in some PUMAs

executive experience: of the four candidates (P & VP), she is the only one with executive experience as an elected official

(side-note, the Obama campaign’s reaction is a joke:

“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency,” said spokesman Bill Burton.

we can play that card back to ‘Today, the Democratic Party put the former editor of the Harvard Law Review …’ or, even better, ‘Today, the Democratic Party put a man with zero executive experience …’ contrast it with McCain’s congratulatory message to Obama on his winning the nomination)

(which really, now that I think about it, this was an excellent opportunity for Obama to say something nice about a woman, cuz he kinda needs to, imho)

contrast: Obama picks an old white guy, a Washington insider prone to racist gaffes, as his vp; McCain chooses a young white woman and Washington outsider — who’s the candidate of change?

p.s. i guess there goes my dream of a Condi Rice vp slot …

p.p.s. also, no Mad Minerva vp slot, another shame, but I sense she’s young and may be better suited for the 2016 elections, when we’ll have to replace McCain-Palin, by which time I also suspect she’ll be half cyborg and therefore able to represent both New Overlord demographics

instapundit roundup of reactions (to the Palin pick, not to MM’s non-pick)

(and not to the non-pick of Rice, either, of course)

(care for some tea?)

anti-PUMA activities?

Simon Owens at Bloggasm is reporting that a number of anti-Obama blogs were shut down after complaints:

After some digging it became apparent that several Blogspot accounts had been shut down because of similar spam issues, and nearly all of them had three things in common: Most were pro-Hillary Clinton blogs, all were anti-Barack Obama, and several were listed on justsaynodeal.com, an anti-Obama website.

I haven’t verified it, but since PUMA blogging seems to have become my thing recently, I thought I’d note it.

h/t Protein Wisdom

###

Update (2008 July 1): An article in the NYT gives more information.  Google (which owns Blogspot) claims it was a problem with their spam filters.  The PUMAs don’t buy it.

Related: PUMA: more wild and wacky election fun, Obambi: hatin’ on Obama

Obambi: hatin’ on Obama

Obambi is an eye-opening site that shows there is some serious Obama hatred around. I ran across it looking through PUMA sites I mentioned previously.

Posts include things like Barack Hussein Obama: 10 Things to Fear and Unity My Ass: Say It Ain’t So Hillary, Barack Obama is a Vile Socialist. But what grabbed my attention most were the graphics. Juxtaposing words like “racist,” “nope,” and “idiot” with images of Obama, and clearly photoshopped images of Obama with Iranian leader Ahmadinajad, really make an impression, of some kind.

Then there’s The Kilzone, which is worse.  Images there mix swastikas, sickle and hammer themes, and other objectionable symbols with Obama images.  Whatever one thinks of Obama, or any of the candidates, none of them are comparable to Nazis or communists, and this kind of imagery is sickening.

PUMA: more wild and wacky election fun

Just got introduced to PUMA – Party Unity My Ass. Apparently, these are the “dead-ender” Clintonistas (insurgency implications included). Here’s some quotes from two PUMA sites:

PUMA Power:

Now is not the time to put a love object in office, a weakling who will be entirely dependent on his power elite enablers. Or worse, he may be a dissembler who has barely disguised his contempt for the voters.

There will be a lot of calls for “Unity!”. But let us acknowledge what this really is. “Unity” is a weapon that the party is going to use against us. It is the emotional blackmail of the teenager. “If you don’t let me have my way, it will be all YOUR fault if something bad happens!” “If you don’t get in line, it will be YOUR fault if we lose.

Cannonfire (toward the end of the post):

The Obot journals have published a few pieces on how to talk to the PUMA partisans. All of these pieces show them to be just as clue-free as Garrett and Dan were in that old skit. None of these pieces suggests that the progs might make some headway if they showed some humility. Here’s a suggested start:

“We spread lies against Clinton. We acted like Freepers. We’re sorry.”

Pure ego forbids them from making this admission. Indeed, the Lightbringer himself has said that he had to “bite his tongue” in dealing with Hillary — as though he were the offended party, as though he were on the receiving end of a smear campaign!

There’s no humility in Obotland. As these reponses to Traister’s piece exemplify, they remain mired in their revolting Messianic adulation of the Lightbringer (even though they no longer even try to defend him against charges of serial prevarication) and in their hatred of all things Clintonian . . .

What a really interesting campaign this continues to be.

Update (2008 June 28 ): US News mentioned this phenomenon, noting that more than 100 anti-Obama blogs have been created in the last 20 days.

Update (2008 June 29): The Confluence has a photo essay on a PUMA protest at a Unity event with both Obama and Hillary. Very interesting. Here’s Just Say No Deal, Party Unity My Ass, Democrats 4 McCain, DNC Monopoly, PUMA Party, and there’s a lot more out there.

Also, I have a new post up about Obambi.com and other hate sites.

Update (2008 June 30): Anti-PUMA activities?

ObamaNos

As I was saying some time ago, Obama’s campaign slogan, ‘Yes, we can!’ is the English version of the pro-amnesty for illegal immigrants slogan, ‘Sí se puede.’

The San Francisco Citizen has the pics.

a breakthrough, not a breakdown

Now Victor Davis Hanson is on about it:

This is what the triangulation of Obama has helped to unleash: most Americans will now doubt the moral authority of the African-American intellectual and religious community not just to question the questionable racial remarks of a Bill Clinton, Ed Rendell, or Geraldine Ferraro, but also the Wright-like crudity of a Don Imus or a Michael Richards. Context is now king.

This disastrous regression in race relations is the natural dividend of liberal identity politics, most recently brought to the fore by the wife of the first “black President”, the first “transracial” black Presidential candidate, and the “prophet” and “healer” Reverend Wright.

Why are people decrying the truth getting out? All that’s happening is Americans are finally seeing what’s been going on all this time, that racism is not just something white people feel, but something quite common in the black community as well. Hiding it, giving black racists unquestioned moral authority, WAS the disaster.

Now we are seeing what I hope will be an awakening, a realization that we MUST question the moral authority of black leaders, and white leaders, and Asian leaders, male and female leaders, in fact, we MUST QUESTION ALL AUTHORITY. That which passes the test, we should hold in high regard. That which doesn’t, i.e., that authority which is being misused by racists and sexists and other bigots, should be dashed against the rocks. That is the only way forward, the only way towards racial conciliation in this nation.

###

H/t Instapundit

Cf. just rhetoric? what?

just rhetoric? what?

All of the hooplah about Obama’s spiritual advisor has generated a little blogstorm it seems. The Anchoress, whom I very much respect, says this is destructive:

I was in the car today and flipped on Sean Hannity and heard him really carrying on, saying that because Obama “sat in those pews for 20 years,” even if he repudiated Wright it would not be “credible.”

. . .

Is Hannity suggesting that a politician must review a pastor’s sermons each week and run around denouncing and deserting those preachers who might cause him a little bit of political heat? Wouldn’t that be both extreme behavior and a bit dis-crediting?

. . .

Wright’s rhetoric is extreme, but it’s just rhetoric.

This issue is pretty thoroughly hashed out in the comments and, whichever side you are on, I highly recommend them. The Anchoress’ comments in response to opponents especially made me think about this issue.

But that’s not what this post is about. This post is about that last line up there, “it’s just rhetoric.”

Nonsense. Rhetoric is the art of persuasion, and it is rarely empty. All a political campaign is, for example, is rhetoric. Nothing more. Even the showy parts, wearing a flag pin (or not), kissing babies, making policy speeches, debates, these are all rhetoric. If the Anchoress means that Wright’s rhetoric is hyperbolic, that’s one thing. To say it’s just rhetoric, as if there is no meaning imparted, as if no one’s mind could possibly be changed by it, is false and dangerous. It was ignoring Hitler’s rhetoric that resulted in WWII. It was ignoring Al Qaeda’s rhetoric that probably led us to fail to predict the 9/11 attacks. It’s been ignoring the racist, hateful, divisive rhetoric of certain black preachers and the Nation of Islam that has strengthened racial division in the US and prevented healing and reconciliation to a certain extent.

Rhetoric should be treated seriously. When the results of one’s words have real consequences, one can stick to his guns or modify his words. Either way, it is only by taking words seriously and acting on what our fellow citizens say that we find out whether the words were truly meaningful or empty rhetoric.

(This post will have a follow-up.) Update 2008 June 21: Or maybe not. It’s been too long to even remember what I wanted to follow up with. I blame grad school.