Liberal Rapture

ALERT! ALERT! Get your very own "We Told You So!" bumpersticker by clicking this sentence!

Friday, May 16, 2008

Later! Not coming back this fall!

The wide assumption in the DNC and Obama cabal of elites and scoundrels is that those of us who refuse to vote for Obama under any circumstances (and we are legion) will come to our senses by November and vote for the chosen one. Since they have no principles beyond money and faddishness they cannot see that our refusal to vote for this woefully unqualified man is fundamentally based in core principles - not anger, disappointment or passing frustration.

The assumption that we will vote for BHO in the end is false and stupid. Here's why: The most consistent Democratic voters in general elections are African Americans and white "arugula" liberals. AA's vote Democratic at a rate over 87% in general elections routinely. A few rich "arugula" or "latte" Democrats bark about Nader or the equivalent every four years - but they invariably wander back to Kerry or Dukakis, etc. The template for disaffected Democrats "always coming back" being put forth by pundits now it based on the history of "latte" Democrats. Not "lunch bucket" Democrats.

This year the disaffected Democrats are lunch bucket dems, not the lattes. Evidence suggests that lunch bucket Dems vote according to a candidate's affinity to their values over all else. The "What's the matter with Kansas?'" meme put forth by the certain elites - including Obama in his famous San Francisco flub - misunderstands something basic: to many of us there are principles more valuable than money. In fact, there is intelligence in understanding that the elected head of government should reflect one's basic values regardless of policy differences. This is not ignorance - it's wisdom.

Obama's 20 year stint in the retrograde church and his encouragement of sexism in his campaign go to core values. It tells us who he is. (Examples: he flipped off a former first lady -there is no denying it, and uses repellent woman hating rap "artists" at his rallies). He has become offensive to 2 large groups of Democrats: blue collar workers and white women. Telling these groups to vote for him merely because he is a registered Democrat and "not McCain" is insulting. I attend a large liberal church. On occasion I disagree with what is said and done there - but overall I am comfortable with it because it reflects my values. A stranger could correctly infer much about my beliefs by viewing sermons I sit through at my church . You can here if you like.

We have every right - in fact every duty - to make judgments about Obama based on where he spent 20 years of his spiritual life. To insist it is all okay because he dumped Wright after a press club rant is to insist that one ignore critical thought. I won't even consider giving Michelle Obama's Princeton thesis a pass until she explains how she changed. Until then it stands as her belief. The onus is on her, not the rest of us. Stop asking us to check our values at the door just so your guy can win. Stop implying we just don't understand Obama when all the evidence suggests we understand him completely. Much more than his myopic fan base.

I will not vote for Obama because he represents values I am fundamentally opposed to: racism, sexism, condesension to the working class, lack of judgement about associates, political expediency, graft, and entitlement.
How can I say this? I've examined not what he has said but what he as done, and where he has spent his adult life. I encourage you to do the same.

Besides, as of now there is no compelling economic reason to violate my core principles and vote for BHO. If there was I might look twice. His "Democratic" economic stances are boilerplate and innocuous. Regarding the economy he inspires no faith and doesn't even seem to understand the basics.

Howard Dean and Barack Obama have willfully shrunk the Democratic big tent. The rump party they have created is no longer the party I was once proud to be part of.

BIG P.S.: Before I get comments about Iraq - let me just add - anyone who thinks Obama is going to magically end that war is a fool of the first order. Obama will fund the war if he wins. He'll have to. Delusions to the contrary are just that - delusions. All 3 candidates are stuck with Iraq. All three candidates will have to spend 4 years backing off the Bush mess. But we are staying in Iraq. We can't up and leave. Stop fantasizing about it. Until we end our addiction to oil, indeed, our need for oil, we will have to have bases in countries with it. Every segment of our American lives depends on oil. So please no crap that starts with "but the war!!!". If you want the war to end cut your energy usage 50% RIGHT NOW. If you won't do that and still insist Obama can get us out of Iraq - then you're too far gone to be bothered with. We ain't there to stop the "bad guys" we're there to make sure the Chinese aren't. The Chinese are stuck making deals with Sudan and Venezuela for now. Sadly, everyone on earth seems to know this except the American public.

Labels: Democratic party, election, Iraq, Obama

Thursday, May 08, 2008

We deserve to know what we are getting.

Barring a damning revelation it now seems BHO will become the nominee. So what to do? I have stated all over the place I won't vote for him. And I almost certainly won't. Comments in the last post indicated that many are feeling the same way. There are the few that scream "sour grapes" and tag this blog as being run by "closet Republicans". This is a hilarious and desperate assertion, based, like all things Obamite, in denial. Plenty of Democrats are unhappy with Obama for plenty of very good reasons. The Obama cult can't - or won't - conceive that a third to half of the core of the Democratic party isn't coming back to Obama, since they have elevated him to flawless messiah status. He can't be wrong, so we must be wrong.
Well - that is wrong.
I won't vote for Obama for many reasons from Ayres to Arrogance and back again. But the basic reason is this: I don't like him and I don't trust him with the job of President. The reasons I don't like him or trust him are simple: he has not earned any trust and he exhibits none of the qualities I look for in a leader. That's not hard to "conceive".

He is a wimp.

This seems so obvious that I don't even think I should have to re-state why this is true, but here goes: He avoids votes. He clung to his retrograde, racist preacher until Axlerod polled enough disgusted voters to convince Obama his self preservation was on the line. BHO did not deep six Wright because of any conviction. His relationship to William Ayres is alarming and tells us a great deal about his lack of judgment. His lies about Ayres are extraordinary. He speaks in vague generalities - just like W - a sure sign of a political animal with no true core. When the campaign really did get tough in the last 2 months he fumbled badly - insulting his grandmother, throwing the bird to Clinton, blaming his debate performance on ABC and generally flailing about like a punk.

He has no vision beyond "we should not bicker so much." The past is bad, mmmkay... This is the most pathetic aspect of Obama. It is the grand lie. Politics in a democracy are divisive. They should be. Real issues and real people are involved. The electorate and those who represent us should duke it out. Countries that don't go to the matt over tough issues are called dictatorships. In fact, we will continue to duke it out- even if Obama makes a thousand lovely speeches. Obama's call to a greater unity is AVOIDANCE not character. He doesn't want to address the difficult issues because he has no core convictions. It means work. Work that does not involve self promotion. Voting "present" on abortion bills in the state senate is emblematic. This is who he is. "Present".

The short hand for all this is: I don't like him.

I diverge from some of my fellow travellers here: I think he can win in November. I give him about a 30% chance. Axlerod is good at the game. McCain has settled on a being a "gentleman" and avoiding Obama's appalling associations. This is a disservice to the country and did not work for Hillary. She could have buried him in January with Ayres and Wright and she chose not to. I like Hillary - but I am mad as hell about how nice she has been to Obama. Democrats like me should not take solace in the idea that he "can't win". He can. It won't be easy. Clinton demurred. The RNC will not. I love the game of politics and I take it seriously as well.

It is going to be fun watching the Republicans unload on Obama. He deserves it. We deserve it. We deserve to know what we are getting.

Labels: Ayers, election, Obama

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

Hunter

Election Day before the returns come in tonight I am going to take a moment to reflect on a loss I and a lot of other people suffered last month. My friend Hunter took his own life in April. That's his pic - looking peaceful. He was 29 years old. Meth addiction - that's all I will say about that, except I pray often that all meth addicts find a way out of that particular addiction. The help is out there, please get it. And I never go spiritual on this blog but today I am: In God's mind gay men and woman are equal partners with everyone else on this planet. Equally beloved, equally saved, equally responsible.

I don't "think" this or "believe" this - I know it. In my bone marrow. Societal thinking to the contrary is wrong, destructive and diseased.
The Baby Dragon Fund has been set up to combat Meth Addiction - especially in gay youth. Give if you can.

I am putting this small tribute to Hunter on L.R. because I loved him and he was one of my political buddies. That is to say - the primary focus of our chats and the time we spent together was talking politics. We did talk about other stuff over the years but his passions, like mine, were often about the game, sport, and machinations of politics. Hunter worked for Howard Dean's campaign in 2004 and I spoke to him nearly every day while he was in Iowa and elsewhere. On election night in 2000 we were all at a friend's house in LA watching the returns - over the moon when Florida was called for Gore - then livid when things turned. For the next month of the recount shenanigans - Hunter and I talked every day. Those of us who love this kind of chatter know this kind of talk well. It really doesn't matter if anything new has happened. We can rehash and pace around and repeat ourselves looking at every angle of every moment of a campaign. It is one of my, and was one of Hunter's, favorite wastes of time. There are a lot of us types - but few with the smarts and earnestness of Hunter. He was untainted by the faux cynicism so in vogue in the 2000's. And, I know from friends who had seen him more recently, he had no patience for the faux hope so in vogue in 2008.

Hunter and I had not talked much about this election. He was off wrestling other demons and life moved me farther away from his circle. But we would have talked, I am sure of it. I know we were of similar minds about how the primary season was working out. And Hunter would not have stayed away for long. I am going to miss him a lot as the year unfolds. Even as this day unfolds.

Despite the pollution of the fundamentalists: the basic teaching of my religion is this: "Life Goes On". One can argue about Christian theology forever - but "Life Goes On" is the take away...

I know Hunter has gone on. I am just damn sad he's not here anymore. Here's to you, Hunter. You will be missed.
and missed.
and missed.

Labels: election, Hunter

Monday, May 05, 2008

Unelectable recorded.

Just for fun a few days ago I posted a satiric re-write of the Nat King Cole song "Unforgettable" called "Unelectable" - about Obama's prospects in a General Election. Over the weekend Gina over at HillaryClintonForum.com sent me word that a person named Lisa V. had recorded it. Check it out here. It is a delight.

Rewritten lyrics here with apologies to Irving Gordon, who wrote this classic.

Unelectable, that's what you are
Unelectable, your past is just too bizarre
That whiff of smug that clings to you
Your mentor has become the big issue
Never before have you been more,
Unelectable, in every way
And forever more, that's how you'll stay
That's why, Barry, it's incredible
That you've become so unelectable.
Super delegates want a winner,
Not you.

Unelectable, that's what you are...

Labels: election, nat king cole, Obama, unelectable, unforgettable

Friday, April 25, 2008

Snobama is melting.

Snobama is melting. When Clinton lost Iowa gleeful posters at the Obamington Post announced that "inevitability" was all she had and now that was gone. Well, after winning every major contest since - including, always including, Florida and Michigan - she has a lot more than inevitability. I commend BHO for his smashing victories in Utah and Kansas and the like. When those states matter to the Democratic nominee he will matter again. Until then he's the guy who won Democratic contests in Republican states. Axelrod glibly stated that working class whites haven't voted for the Democratic nominee in a long time anyway. True enough. Then again, Democrats usually lose national elections, too - so David's point was??? Since 1968 Democrats are 3-8. That doesn't even get you invited to the half time show at the Papajohns.com bowl.

All Obama had was his "transformational aura". That is now gone. Now he's now a guy who makes you queasy because he hangs out with a lose confederation of terrorists, slumlords and loco preachers. As I've said six zillion times before on this blog - Obama has had ample chance to fill in his blank spots for voters. He is unwilling to do so. I happen to believe that he believes he should not have to. Grand speeches that lead to nowhere and back again are all he thinks he should have to do. To hear him is to love him. That should be enough for us ruffians. Let him eat his waffle. He answered "like 6 questions" about Rezko! Golly! He doesn't have to debate in North Carolina because debates are so common. Sometime after Wright exploded Obama's aura transformed into soot.

He wasn't defeated in Pennsylvania. He was destroyed. Philly was the only reason he stayed within 10% of her. Rural Democrats and Democrats in Pittsburgh walked off the Obama bus in droves. Those numbers are worse then they appear. In many counties Clinton won 70-30%. Pennsylvania is not only needed by a Democrat in a general election - it is almost an assumption going in, just this side of D.C.

A Democrat who can't convince Ohio and Pennsylvania in a primary is a Democrat who is going to lose in November. Period.

The DNC and the media are hell bent to shove Obama down our throats. Other than a certain rabies like quality emanating from Howard Dean and Donna Brazile there is no reason Michigan and Florida can't be enfranchised right now. Obama took his own name off the Michigan ballot. No one forced him. Florida had a free and open election. (Odd as that may seem...) Dean just has to quote Dr. Rice and say "mistakes were made", seat the delegations and move on.

The super delegates are being blackmailed with the race card. It really is as simple as that. If our guy is not your choice we will... fill in the blank with real or vague threats. Caving to this blackmail will be the end of the Democratic Party. Obama's campaign is poisonous.

Labels: election, loser, Obama

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Obama the loser

If this was a race between Hillary and Obama in a general election the race would have been called by now. See pic. Clinton's states are blue, BHO's red. She already has the needed "270 votes". Obama has proven again tonight that he cannot carry a big state outside his home state. This is a disaster for Democrats in the general election. And many of BHO's wins are in caucus states and are inherently undemocratic and misleading. Super Delegates need to think long and hard about choosing a almost certain loser in Obama. At least 13 of the states Obama has won are sure to go GOP in the fall. Only 4 Clinton states will probably go GOP.

Labels: Clinton, election, Obama

Sunday, April 13, 2008

Obama has again proven himself to be effete and entitled.

My My My the Obamites are losing it. I have reports from the field that the Obamite commenters are in full melt down mode on most blogs. I don't dip too deeply into the rampant pro obama media and blogs anymore. Life is too short to be bothered with childish fanatics. The most important political take away from Obama's idiotic remarks and weak explanation is this:
More than likely, HE JUST LOST PENNSYLVANIA TO MCCAIN IN THE FALL. The road to Obama actually being in the White House just got much narrower. Florida is out of reach and Ohio looks bad. West Virginia should be put squarely in the GOP column now. I would even say he'll have to do some explaining in Massachusetts. A lot of voters are not going to take kindly to him when reminded of Wright and his San Fran gaffe in tandem.

D.C. and Illinois are probably still safe for Barry.

The list of proofs that Obama is an arrogant, entitled brat is now longer than ever. There are many ways to look at Obama's latest offensive remarks. Let's look at a few:

1. The man is a political fool. The remarks to San Francisco are a violation of politics 101. In 1984 Gary Hart said on the eve of the California and New Jersey primaries to a group of California supporters that they where lucky whereas "he had to go back to New Jersey". Mondale promptly kicked his ass in New Jersey and that was that for Hart. Obama did him three better in Pennsylvania: he insulted gun owners, all religious people, and said in essence to white voters that they were bitter toward anyone "who was not like them". Nice. Especially coming from a man who has gotten quite a lot of white support. Gratitude is not the Obama family's long suit.

2. The statement is just wrong. Pennsylvania is above the national average in income and has made a small, but real come back since Billy Joel's Allentown defined it. This is largely because of the hard work of Pennsylvanians. Read this to get the low down.

3. The statement itself is a compendium of all the latte liberal nonsense that loses election after election for Democrats. One can easily imagine Dukakis opining in a similar way. One can hardly imagine LBJ, FDR, or Bill Clinton being so breathlessly condescending. both because they were politically smarter than Obama and, frankly, they weren't brats.

What he said:

Pennsylvanians were "bitter" and "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations"

Wow. Really where to begin? It is an astounding list of insults. The most offensive being that religious people are, in fact, religious to the degree that economic hard times have befallen them. I suppose if one spent 20 years in the "Our Lady of Perpetual Resentment" congregation one might think of any religion not full of anti-American, anti-white clap trap was merely a bromide and sedative. The subtext here is: the faithful are being taken for a ride and are therefore stupid. Obama is saying that the religious "cling" to Catholicism, and the Quaker faith, and the rest out of empty headedness and fear. This statement is appalling and, as a religious person, very hard not to take personally.

He started the nonsense with:
"They feel so betrayed by government that when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by - it's true that when it’s delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism."

I can only repeat this truism about the Obama Entitlement Express: when it works for him he says "race doesn't or shouldn't matter" When it looks like things won't break his way it's because he's black. The sentiment here is clear: If I lose it is because they were skeptical because I am a "46-year-old black man named Barack Obama". HE can't possibly imagine losing because the people wanted someone else. He still seems stunned that he can campaign in a state and then lose. As he said last summer "to know him is to love him."

The sentence assumes that Pennsylvanians inherently should trust him - why? - I guess because he showed up - and that skepticism is wrong in any case. The idea that voters might ask him to prove that he can deliver never enters the equation for him. I've noticed time and time again that the one question he and his supporters can never answer is "Why should we choose you?". One gets a response, but never an answer.

Let me add: His entire "pitch" is premised on the most basic level of cynicism: people will go with whoever makes them feel good regardless of who they actually are or have been. This is why the speeches are so good and the content of the campaign and its leader are so empty.

I have nothing much to add about "clinging to guns" except it is classic latte liberal foolishness. Gun owners are not particular clingy types in any case. Again: Obama just doesn't get it. In his world people "cling to guns". In the gun owners world it is their right to have them. The reason liberals like his San Francisco audience cannot ever win this argument is because their premise is always gun owners are hicks. Having a reasonable conversation about the 2nd Amendment is off the table immediately. I do not own a gun. I am for much stricter gun control laws. But knowing a few gun owners who are hardly hicks I chafe at lefty remarks like Obama's. Obama telegraphs his contempt for gun owners. I can only hope they respond in the voting booth.

I hold out no hope that the MSM will treat his remarks fairly. The ability to deny facts on the ground when you've invested so much pie in the sky is astonishing. Olbermann will probably make the blogger at the Huffpost the "worst person in the world". Matthews must be in a cold sweat about how to spin this to his fellow Quaker Staters.

The damage is done. Obama has again proven himself to be an effete, entitled, numbskull.

Labels: arrogant, barack the brat, brat, cling, election, entitled, gun owners, idiot, insulting, numbskull, Obama, Pennsylvania, religion, remarks, snotty