One of the most appealing and interesting guys in the Republican Party, but he

lost

his race for the Senate. That and his relative anonymity would make him less viable as a running mate for McCain: no top-of-the-state experience (Lt. Govs. don’t generally have much authority), no national experience or exposure either, except for Fox and an interview or two on the Sunday shows.

He should be in the McCain cabinet, though.

I found this here, not an original source but checkable against the book:

The actual quote from the book is from page 261 and is as follows:

“Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”

Ambiguous, with lots of wiggle room IMHO.

Gilda on May 21, 2008 at 10:43 AM

Not really; he’s pretty clearly saying that if a nasty backlash against Moslem immigrants developed as a result of September 11th, he’d support the Moslems. As well all of us should.

We need a better smoking gun than that.

“I’ll be ready to write the conservative movement’s epitaph when (a) Barack Obama is inaugurated, and (b) Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid enact some stuff with more lasting impact than the meager results of 1977-80 or 1993-4. There’s real reason to believe a congressional party much less dependent on the votes of white south moderates will, in fact, be able to deliver more”.

Dickie Morris is a lying, petulant, little TWIT!

grtflmark on May 21, 2008 at 10:37 PM

The little Dicks hatred for Hillary is so great that he breaks down every time he analyzes any thing having to do with her.

Ed Morrissey said: The common thread appears more ideological than racial, and Oregon and Vermont tend to prove it.

Ed, maybe it’s more complicated than that. It can be both ideological and racial. College leftists react on the basis of emotion, white guilt, and ignorance. More moderate white Democrats react to affirmative action and black racism. Obama is clearly identified with both. The two camps both have “racial” reactions in this sense.

blacks who vote mindlessly for melanin over character, insulting Martin Luther King, Jr.s memory.

Amen.
Judge not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

ObaMarx has the character of a Karl Marx, not a MLK,Jr.

They can project more of their slapdash Utopian fantasies upon His Blankness.

Hillary, on the other hand, already has an image and character, and thus resists the fatuous projections of the gullible, infatuated, Messsianic suckers.

Race has almost nothing to do with it.

(Except among the It’s Payback Time For Whitey blacks who vote mindlessly for melanin over character, insulting Martin Luther King, Jr.s memory.)

Ideology, zero.

The SPLIT in the Democrat Party is Ideological – NOT Racial

Dickie Morris is a lying, petulant, little TWIT!

The SPLIT is between the Centrist and Loony-Left Wings of the Democratic Party….the Media AND the Looney-Left (part and parcel of the same thing) are trying to elect the MOST Liberal possible candidate instead of the one that can TRULY Challenge McLame.

They may succeed.

There is absolutely zero doubt in my mind that an Obama Presidency will bring nothing good to this country. He is securely in the Marxist/Maoist camp and, given his empty “Hope” message, his election may be considered a ‘Mandate for Change’. What truly zorches me is the cover he is getting from the current crop of Democrat Congress Critters and the ever Socialist loving MSM. What do all of Comrade Obama’s enablers have in common? Lots of wealth they will keep while the nomenkaltura see their earning power whither away to nothing.

Thanks to the poison of black liberation theology being taught in black churches we have a new brand of racism in our nation.

Darvin Dowdy on May 21, 2008 at 8:24 AM

This is a false meme created by Jeremiah Wright. If he’s distorting everything else, why believe what he says here?

One thing: I can’t prove it, but I think that tenets (tentacles) of BLT have seeped into the “black community”–not via churches with predominantly black congregations, but through word-of-mouth. Old wives tales and the like.

“..in late 1994 or early 1995, Obama made what I think was probably the key move in his early career. He was named Chairman of the Board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a $50 million grant program to funnel money into reform efforts at Chicago schools. It turns out that the architect of the Annenberg Challenge was Bill Ayers, who designed the grant proposal and sheparded it to success”

If you haven’t read this article by a law professor at Santa Clara; I highly recommend it. This online article is the most in-depth post-law school political biography of Obama that I’ve seen published. It covers the Ayers connection in great depth.

Thus, we have one possible answer to the question: Who “sent” Obama? It was the Ayers family, including Tom, John, Bill and Bernardine Dohrn.
Who Sent Obama?

Look at who’s angry and who their angry at, its the sexist liberals screaming racist and its the racist liberals screaming sexist.

Life is good.

Actually, it’s both. Obama is a Black, Marxist and each factor will play a major role in the upcoming election.
rplat on May 21, 2008 at 8:00 AM

I think his Marxism could be the worst variety; Maoism

I suggest this election will, as J.R. Dunn over at American Thinker opines, be transformative in that the Democrat Party will become more openly Socialist.
SeniorD on May 21, 2008 at 8:15 AM

A former student informed me he was backing Obama yesterday. He graduated a few years ago, so I took the risk of debating his choice with him and bringing up Bill Ayers. I had been his mentor and felt secure that he respected my work and opinions.

I asked if he knew about Obama’s very unusual appointments* –following his 2nd year out of law school—when he was chosen** to direct the multi-million dollar Annenberg Challenge project by Bill Ayers’s father. He had not heard of the situation, nor did he know of Ayers’s political launching party for Obama at their home; or how Michelle Obama recruited Ayers to teach several workshops with Obama. Neither did he know of the report that Mr. Jones, the Illinois State Senate Leader, had ordered all the work on bills accomplished by senior state senators be turned over to Obama one year before he ran for Congress. None of the emerging facts which prove that Obama lied about having a casual relationship with Bill Ayers and lied about his work in the state senate were familiar.

His response was to become angry and inform me that he didn’t think any of those situations had been proven. This reaction came from someone who knows I would not state something unless I had legitimate grounds for my convictions. He did not want to hear anything negative about Obama.

This young man is not a socialist or even a liberal; but primarily a moderate libertarian in the sense of being a fiscal and social moderate. He also had noticeable patriotism and acted as civic-minded volunteer. I would rank him as one of my most promising students. A bright, rational and insightful person by any criteria. He was not prone to emotional outbursts, anti-social behavior or overt hero worship.

I was stunned watching his hostile reactions to my information. How did this calm, logical personality develop such blind passion for a politician? It went against everything I thought I understood about his character. My final thought: If the Obama cult could seduce this young man; no one under 25 is safe.

* appointments

**without prior experience in education

Throw in the fact that Steele’s youth and charisma would contrast poorly to McCain’s extreme age and crankiness and it is a non-starter. You never are supposed to outshine the bride and that rule holds in Presidential politics too.

highhopes on May 21, 2008 at 2:43 PM

Michael Steele is a liberal/moderate Republican. He is an attractive candidate for many reasons but Conservatism is not on of them.

That’s the story of East Austin.

maverick muse on May 21, 2008 at 2:23 PM

I live in Austin and was just thinking the same thing. Yours and thuja’s are perfect descriptions. I work with several of these young white liberals who now proudly live in ‘diverse’ neighborhoods on the East Side. I know they secretly feel guilty for being part of the force that drove the oldtimers out of the neighborhood, but they’ll never admit it. Just wait till their kids are school age and they start sending them to private schools rather than the neighborhood elementary, then the rationalizations will really move into overdrive.

McCain is seen as a RINO and a traitor by many (whether it’s fair or not doesn’t really matter). He could use a solid conservative of any stripe.

Darth Executor on May 21, 2008 at 2:27 PM

Oh! It’s entirely fair to consider McCain a RINO and political traitor. McCain needs a solid conservative on his team but that isn’t enough. It has to be a solid conservative who can convince social conservatives and evangelicals (the 2/3 of the party McCain has dismissed as irrelevant to his success) that their views would be part of a McCain administration. That means creating the illusion that McCain intends to work with whomever is nominated as VP and Steele would come off as being put forward because of race with no chance of doing anything in McCain’s administration except ceremonial jobs.

Throw in the fact that Steele’s youth and charisma would contrast poorly to McCain’s extreme age and crankiness and it is a non-starter. You never are supposed to outshine the bride and that rule holds in Presidential politics too.

’nuff said.

Ambiguous, the liberal standard of truth.

maverick muse on May 21, 2008 at 2:17 PM

Bingo! Obama should change the title of his book to
The Ambiguity of Hope. And Change. And, uhhh, Preconditions.

That being said, Steele would be a bad choice for McCain. He (Steele) is too much of a social conservative

highhopes on May 21, 2008 at 1:54 PM

Yeah, because if there’s one group of people McCain has in the bag, it’s social conservatives. /sarc

McCain is seen as a RINO and a traitor by many (whether it’s fair or not doesn’t really matter). He could use a solid conservative of any stripe.

That’s the story of East Austin. Poor old folks who’ve lived there all life long, paid off the mortgage years ago, but no income now and can’t afford the white liberal city council tax assessments on their little old cottages. It’s sad to hear their lives stories as they sell out, unable to pay the property taxes. And where the heck are they supposed to relocate?! Affordable housing is a sick lie that paves the way of “neighborhood revitalization” aka development with purpose. Get rid of the food gobblers, as socialists would have it.

What??? He is both experienced and well-known:

Red Pill on May 21, 2008 at 1:39 PM

True. But what I said, and possibly failed to adequately convey, was:

…Steele is not experienced or well-known enough to be the obvious, clear choice…

Compared to contenders like Romney, Huckabee, Lieberman, Crist, Barbour, Giuliani, Pawlenty, Palin, etc., Steele doesn’t stand out when it comes to either experience or name recognition. So, it would open vulnerability to charges of “tokenism,” warranted or not.

Ambiguous, with lots of wiggle room IMHO.

Gilda on May 21, 2008 at 10:43 AM

You got that right.
Ambiguous, the liberal standard of truth.
But back to BHO, the Obamas LOVE referencing the UGLY.

You’d think the Rino would figure it out.
Birds of a feather flock together.
And moderates aren’t gonna vote McCain
any more and maybe less than they’re
gonna vote for Obama,
given IMAGE = CHARACTER
–acceptance of a falsehood.