Why can't Obama break away from McCain?

Frank Turek had a great editorial in Townhall.com today, called “The Presidency Is Not An Entry-Level Position.”

Excellent reading. He really nailed it, IMHO.
 
An apology ...

... a mule and forty acres might do the trick.
"So what does he mean by saying that the US government needs to "not just offer words, but offer deeds"? What does he mean by "deeds"? Cash payments?"
Click to expand...
Of course more freebies might be needed to negotiate a future settlement. Things like:

Free health care
Free education
Free food
Free job training
Free housing
Free transportation

Oh, hold on a second. I just realized they already have all that and more free stuff to boot.

I guess that won't work will it?

Well then how about not having to pay any Income Tax for life?

Darn, since they don't need to work beyond maintaining a minimum income level, many never pay a cent in Income tax their whole life already so that won't work either. What a life!

Short of giving them a lifetime cash allowance, I just don't see where we can go on this deal.

(FYI, All of the above are misrepresentation and misleading statements based in sarcasm.)
 
Last edited:
So what does he mean by saying that the US government needs to "not just offer words, but offer deeds"? What does he mean by "deeds"? Cash payments? Reparations? Why hasn't the MSM asked that question?
Click to expand...

Of course none of you guys actually bother to find out the truth about his statement. He has clearly stated he thinks the best "reparations" for slavery would simply be to allow every one to have an equal chance at the American dream. He did not suggest direct reparations.

Obama is bad enough without people just totally making stuff up. Plenty of reasons to vote against him without resorting to misrepresentation and misleading statements.
 
He has clearly stated he thinks the best "reparations" for slavery would simply be to allow every one to have an equal chance at the American dream.
Click to expand...


Hee hee. We've all got an equal chance. Given that equal chance, some identifiable groups have done a lot better than others. This is what is tying a lot of people in knots. It goes against the theory. The theory can't be wrong, you see. So, the facts are wrong. And anybody who acknowledges the facts is a thought criminal.


There is no way to make everybody above average. So, to fix the problems, you've got to take money (and other things) away from some people and to give it to other people. There are all kinds of ways of doing that. And they have innocuous-sounding names like affirmative action, outreach, etc. They all boil down to the same thing.


But that's the old paradigm. There's a new paradigm developing. I don't think Obama's going to make it in 2008. I think he's a generation or so early. Think of him as foreshadowing, a precursor. But America is destined for hard-core, race-based political alignments in which the two-party system will be worked for the racial spoils it can generate.


Reparations? Oh, that's phrasing it mildly. 50 years from now, I think one of the parties will have total, one-party control of some sections of the country. Political gangsters and kleptocrats will run those parts of the country into the ground, stealing everything they can grab.


Will there be anything left for the good people in America? We'll see. I suspect it'll be quite a battle. Right now, people are still sorting themselves into their new categories.
 
He has clearly stated he thinks the best "reparations" for slavery would simply be to allow every one to have an equal chance at the American dream.
Click to expand...
In theory everyone already has this. The reality of the matter is that the people that Obama wants to advance are already given unfair advantages such as race quotas in jobs, affirmative action, race based government contract assignments, "political correctness," "reverse racism," etc.

Unless Obama's got a secret mind control machine that's going to get certain people that resemble him (the same way he doesn't resemble the guy on the dollar bill) to get with the program, the only way to equalize the races will be to rob the hard working achievers and give to the delinquents.

Seriously, do you think that if Obama could endorse 20 years of Wright and Pfluger's unbelievable anti white racism that he doesn't plan to put the screws to those same whites the minute he got the chance? And with our current donkey-controlled congress he just might get that chance.

Of course none of you guys actually bother to find out the truth about his statement.
Click to expand...
What makes you sure that your benevolent opinion is so accurate? Like Mulder, You Want To Believe.
 
OK so what is it you think Obama would do?
Click to expand...
Well he would get back at those achiever...er...oppresive people that have worked...er...exploited poor people to earn....extort an unfairly comfortable life. Justice would be to take from these villains and give to the huddled masses via:

• "Universal," "guaranteed" health care.

• "Free" college tuition.

• "Universal national service" (a la Havana).

• "Universal 401(k)s" (in which the government would match contributions made by "low- and moderate-income families").

• "Free" job training (even for criminals).

• "Wage insurance" (to supplement dislocated union workers' old income levels).

• "Free" child care and "universal" preschool.

• More subsidized public housing.

• A fatter earned income tax credit for "working poor."

• And even a Global Poverty Act that amounts to a Marshall Plan for the Third World, first and foremost Africa.

His new New Deal also guarantees a "living wage," with a $10 minimum wage indexed to inflation; and "fair trade" and "fair labor practices," with breaks for "patriot employers" who cow-tow to unions, and sticks for "nonpatriot" companies that don't.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury."
Click to expand...

Democracy or a Republic? Democrat or Republican?

The word(s) democratic/democracy don't appear in the Constitution of the United States. But how convinced are the masses that the President is supposed to do what the majority of people want him to do? A man running for office on promises of free stuff has confidence that the masses mostly believe that. He may be right.........if he is then the quote above is at hand.

Did anyone see 'Globalist' in Obama's trip? The President isn't supposed to do the bidding of the majority, and especially isn't supposed to be looking to other countries for affirmation, the President is supposed to be single minded in what is best for the United States of America proper. The House of Representatives is the People's House, not the White House. The White House is to be looking after the nation. The Senate is supposed to be looking out for their State's interests.

DUH you might say. Duh indeed. Should be a no brainier. Running for President on promises to bring pork to the poor is demonstrative of the candidates pure lack of the sense of the job.
 
Bruxley, my previous question was with regard to reparations for the descendents of slaves, not just Obama policies in general. You don't have to convince me his positions on the things you mentioned are all bad. But those ideas and policies would be applied to everyone, not just descendents of slaves. So you can't really call that reparations if everyone is involved.

My question can be clarified:

What will Obama do specifically with respect to reparation for descendents of slaves?
 
OK so what is it you think Obama would do?
Click to expand...


Probably not that much*. I think the political and economic situation isn't ripe yet for an Obama. It may never be at the Federal level.


One thing he might accomplish, though, is to further drive white people out of the Democratic party. After four years of Obama, even real dum-dums** may be able to see what's coming.


*every loonie Lefty idea that Congress puts on his desk
**maybe even including the cankles
 
I cannot attest to how big a factor this is having but I did read an article at the airport the other day that did not deal directly with Obama but with phone polls. It was saying how people under 45 are being sorely under represented in phone polls because fewer and fewer of them have conventional land lines. The story said that in some major markets, only 25% of people 18-40 has traditional phone service. It jumped to 90% in the 50+ catagory. The current phone polls only use published directories for contact information and cell phone numbers are not published.
Click to expand...

If this is true that is a bad sign for pro-gunners. Younger people are decidedly pro-Obama.
 
"Young" people were supposedly for Gore and Kerry too.

It's difficult for me to gauge which demographic is going for whom.

For example, I have an aunt who teaches learning disabled inner-city kids in Atlanta.

She is the most liberal member of the family on my mother's side. I think she voted for McGovern back in the day. I seriously doubt she's ever voted Republican in her life. To her, they're evil.

I don't suppose I can really explain to you how liberal she is, because it shocks even me. It is almost like a caricature of a liberal.

And she's been into "New Age" stuff. Homeopathic medicine, UFOs, ghosts, the whole shebang.

Last month at a family get-together she shocked everyone by announcing that she was considering voting for McCain this time around.

I wasn't there because I was at Camp Perry competing and I'm told she didn't offer much of an explanation for this.

So I have to guess. Part of it has to be that she was a Hillary supporter (she is a white female professional, after all) and was angry at how Hillary was railroaded.

That's just part of it. The other, larger part of it may be that working with inner-city kids in Atlanta and having interactions with their parents has lifted the veil on her eyes concerning minorities and political realities about their behavior. That's about as polite as I can put it. To put it another way, I think she's come to realize that the problems that plague them are largely of their own making.

To put it another way, I think it's because Obama is black.

The voting demographic to watch has always been the white male voter. With it, Reagan showed twice that you didn't need women or minorities to take the White House.

In this election, it will be interesting to see how women vote. Not sure how it's going to go.
 
It seems to me that the two of them can't break away from each other because neither is the leader that the public really wants. Obama represents change but he's ultra-liberal, inexperienced, arrogant, and much too idealistic for the job. McCain is a shifty centrist who leans right, he's old, he gets too angry at times, his administration won't be very different from the previous administration, and he's practically a lifer in the Senate.

Since the independents/moderates will have to wear clothespins on their noses when they vote this year they're going to take a while to make up their minds. Plus it's only the opening skirmishes of the general presidential campaign. The lowdown dirtiness, nastiness, and flat out ****slinging they have promised not to wallow in hasn't even really begun yet.
 
Last month at a family get-together she shocked everyone by announcing that she was considering voting for McCain this time around.

I wasn't there because I was at Camp Perry competing and I'm told she didn't offer much of an explanation for this.
Click to expand...

Many white middle class liberals are not supporting Obama, and the only real reason I can think of for this is that their is a lot of closet racism amongst white middle and upper class liberals. Perhaps that is why they are so ready to push affirmative action and similar programs on the rest of us.

Obama should be a liberal's wet dream. He is pro-big government, wants to raise taxes and spending, increase social programs, withdraw from the war, ban guns, etc. What is not for a liberal to like?
 
I think you ...

... Think too much.
"Many white middle class liberals are not supporting Obama, and the only real reason I can think of for this is that their is a lot of closet racism amongst white middle and upper class liberals."
Click to expand...
It is not always about race. Have you considered there are degrees of liberal and many "White Middle and Upper Class Liberals" do not share the same values or politics as Obama irrespective of skin color? You sir are a closet racist if that is "the only reason I can think of" or are you singularly limited in your thought processes?

Which is it?



.
 
Have you considered there are degrees of liberal and many "White Middle and Upper Class Liberals" do not share the same values or politics as Obama irrespective of skin color? You sir are a closet racist if that is "the only reason I can think of" or are you singularly limited in your thought processes?
Click to expand...


Ok, so tell me on what major issue besides the war do Obama and Hillary differ so badly that someone voting for Hillary simply could not bring themselves to vote for Obama? In the Republican party, McCain and Romney were pretty different, but no one who was a Romney supporter will likely vote for a democrat over McCain. So how are Obama and Hillary so different that it prevents the same?

The difference has to be in a way that would go against liberal policies, of course.

I know it hurts the Republican party to have so little to run on that it is now counting on racist liberals to join McCain in the defeat of Obama. But if we join with these people now, it will change the Republican party for the worse.
 
Unregistered ,Obama does not have the experience to lead our nation. Doesn`t matter if he is green. IMO the only reason Hillary is not the Dem. nominee is the baggage she brought to table with her caused by 'slick willie",which even alot of Dems. are sick of and some of policy ideas are different than Obama. A person would be a fool to think that there will be certain people(liberal or not) that will not vote for Obama simply cause he`s black. That person would also be a fool not to think that Obama will get some of his votes simply cause he is black. Its on both sides of the fence. Sad thing is these people voting in this manner aren`t smart enough to look into Obama`s past and see his short voting record on past issue`s, the lifelong characters he`s known to have shared values and ideas with, and the fact(again) his lack of domestic and foriegn experience in general. Also I would have to ask that if the so called"off the air" statements made by the"Rev Jessie Jackson " would be considered racist or just the fact that Jackson doesn`t like Obama? P.S. Stealing your opponents votes in an election is politics, thats the whole idea of campaigning.
 
Obama isn't the post-racial candidate the MSM likes to pretend. He's tried to get as authentically black as he could his whole life. If you're a white man, he doesn't see himself as being on your side. You're his ATM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top