Letters to the Editor
-
LeCastor
So, if he gets the nomination and wins the presidency and does indeed live up to his promise of change and hope, passing progressive legislation, restoring America's reputation (at least partially) and ending the occupation, will you be back here talking about how wrong you were and admitting that you were basing your comments on nothing but fear.
I'm not saying he'll manage to do any of those things, but if he does will you have the courage to come here and admit you were wrong or will you be hiding, sure the sky is about to cave in?
-
Not again
She spoke the truth, and no one would believe her, about the impending doom. She probably wondered -- when will everyone wake up from this weird drug-induced hallucination that everything is going to be great?
Or I think of Bacchus and his entranced followers dancing in the forest, and ripping to shreds any male that dare interrupt their ritual.
He makes me want to go stand on a street corner and pass out pamphlets about the impending apocalypse.
I am completely baffled by the fact the groups that make up Obama's core supporters -- college-educated, making more than $50k, have fallen for his tired bromides and vague promises that will never come true, that they think Messiah will bring everyone together through some sort of magic peace dust.
Sometimes I feel like the only sane person around.
---Patronizing, much?
http://www.slate.com/id/2182073/
-
An "Obamacan" Speaks
This thread has had a few bright moments, but mostly it has been the usual (of late) deterioration into mindless name-calling and oneupsmanship that has come to characterize the desperation of part of the progressive-leaning population for the security of the known, the past, the used, the "comfortable old pair of jeans", which is precisely what brought us under the clumsy wooden fist of George Dubya Bush.
There have been a few very large bones of contention regarding the suitability of Barack Obama to be the Democratic nominee for President. The most recent one was a remark by his wife. Now again please bear in mind I am a lifelong Republican trying to defend and, yes, even boost my chosen candidate, Barack Obama. Michele Obama's "gaffe" about her feeling pride, makes my point. She said she felt "...proud of my country for the first time in my adult life...". Me too. You know, I've been so desperate for a candidate who would lead all the people in the interest of the people and using those uniquely American values which make us We the People, that I have not voted for a Republican candidate for President since 1972! I had hopes for Jimmy Carter. I supported Bill Clinton vigorously (and not just through, you should pardon the expression, lip service). But I have had little to feel actual pride in over the past quarter century. I began to lose it during the Reagan administration, against which I also voted both times. By the time of Bush the Elder, I was despairing for my country. There was a breather (but that is all) during the Clinton years. Then the bottom completely fell out during the past seven years, and I have watched my fellow Americans devolve ever more deeply into something like aimlessly milling sheep. That same quarter century pretty much coincides with Michele Obama's adult life. Taking into account that she is a "hostile" black woman with "an attitude" (how better to crush a black woman's pride than to portray her as uppity for speaking her mind), I am amazed at her restraint in her remarks. But she was speaking about what's happening now, not her trials as a black woman. She was speaking about the phenomenon surrounding her husband running for President, which brings us to my second point:
The Obama phenomenon is not a Democratic one. It is not a media creation. The reason we who support the man is not because we have "drunk the kool aid" but because we see him as creation, not the other way around (as a conventional politician, ie-Hillary Clinton, might). We are celebrating We, the People who have put him in the driver's seat. For the first time in my memory, the American People are having a collective out-of-the-rut-if-not-the-body experience, and learning what it really means to choose a leader, based on something besides the choices offered us by the establishment and the two major (and equally incompetent) parties. We have found someone and put him up front. He is beholden to us, and we believe he will pay us back in kind. We have chosen him because we like him far better than the choices we have been handed by our respective parties as the annointed ones. We the People are making a choice, and if our chosen candidate wins, we will have proven something that has only been mouthed over and over in this country: that The People rule, and the government serves at our pleasure.
Wouldn't that be something, if it actually turns out that way? Just once?
I know this is pretty wild talk, this choosing a candidate because we like him and not because he was presented to us. It's wild-eyed idealism! So shoot us. That was probably not far down on Dubya's to-do list anyway.
Word to the wiseguy.
-
LeCastor
It's sad that you feel the need to denigrate Obama supporters in such away. You are, unfortunately, repeating tired talking points which aren't doing anything to help wake up these supposed cult members; instead you are just alienating us. If you want us to stop snorting the magic peace dust, then maybe you should focus on why the canidate you're backing (I won't presume to know) is better than what Obama is offering.
To be honest, aren't most of Obama's policies very similiar to Clinton's policies? And don't they have a comprabable amount of time in elected office?
So, please, tell us brainwashed Obamabots why we should be supporting Hillary.
-
@ Lynx, The Czarina: Me on corner screaming "Wake up, people!"
@The Czarina: you're countering an accusation/statement I have not made. My beef with Barry has little to do with the experience/no experience dichotomy, though I really appreciate how he's had no qualms about using someone's Washington insider status against them, which is a tactic that is the last refuge of the likes of Mitt Romney, not Messiah.
@ Lynx: Yes, yes I am. I've thought about this a lot, about the risk of taking a position and willing to pay for it if I am wrong, and in Barry's case, I feel it my bones that if he does win the general election (meaning he manages to not be McGovern), which is not guaranteed, we are headed for another Carter, and how dearly we paid for that one-termer.
Plus, I think you're moving the goalposts: "does indeed live up to his promise of change and hope, passing progressive legislation, restoring
America's reputation (at least partially) and ending the occupation."
Passing progressive legislation, partially restoring America's reputation and ending the occupation are just the beginning Jesus Hussein Christ's promises. Those are the same promises as Hillary (excpet hillary explicitly has universal health coverage as one of her progressive promises). No, no, Obama has gone far beyond that: he has promised us he will bring the country together, inspire more change and hope beyond just his own works in Washington, open a new era in America, forever change the politics in this country, and heal its divisions (i personally don't want my divisions with prolifers and homophobes "healed," btw) and on and on and on.
And I don't buy that line no matter who is selling it, Repug or Dem. The support among Dems for Obama just proves that Dems are just as susceptible to cheap rhetoric as Repugs, something I didn't want to believe was true. I thought we were the smart, reasonable, adult, responsible party. Turns out, we're just as much an irrational mob as any other group.