Laugh of the day: Obama blames McCain for messianic imagery
posted at 12:30 pm on August 17, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Earlier, I linked to the CBN interview David Brody conducted with Barack Obama to point out the Democrat’s continued untruthfulness on the infanticide-prevention measure that Obama opposed in the Illinois legislature. In reading one other portion of the interview transcribed by Brody, Obama accuses John McCain of deliberately targeting him with both messianic and anti-Christ imagery in an attempt to impugn his character:
Brody: Let me ask you a little about some of these ads that John McCain has been running not just on television, but on the web. Let’s face it, let’s call a spade a spade, there has been some Messianic references, there’s been some antichrist stuff going on, the celebrity, they’re trying to pigeonhole you a certain way. Do you believe this is being done on purpose?
Obama: Well of course it’s being done on purpose. They’re not spending a whole bunch of money to make me out as a good guy. They’re engaging in the kind of politics that I think we’ve become accustomed to which is you try to tear your opponents down and you engage in sort of slash and burn tactics. And very personal sort of personal character attacks. And one of the challenges for us in this campaign is how do you make sure those attacks are answered quickly and forcefully, but also truthfully and that we don’t fall into that same kind of tactic.
Obama doesn’t fall into the same tactic? Really? How about on June 21st in Jacksonville, when he accused McCain of preparing racist attacks on him?
“It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy,” Obama told a fundraiser in Jacksonville, Florida. “We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run. They’re going to try to make you afraid.
“They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?”
Or perhaps July 30, when Obama claimed that McCain had already begun racist attacks:
“They know that you’re not real happy with them and so the only way they figure they’re going to win this election is if they make you scared of me,” Obama continued, repeating an attack from earlier in the day. “What they’re saying is ‘Well, we know we’re not very good but you can’t risk electing Obama. You know, he’s new, he doesn’t look like the other presidents on the currency, he’s a got a funny name.’”
As for the anti-Christ imagery, no one can actually point to anything coming from the McCain campaign, except for Obama’s own logo coming out of a sunset in one commercial poking fun at his celebrity, which apparently resembles the cover art from Tim LaHaye’s rapture-based Left Behind novel series. On the charges of racism, Dan Balz notes that the Obama campaign cannot produce a single example from either the McCain campaign or the RNC. Obama hasn’t let a lack of evidence keep him from perptuating his smear campaign against John McCain — which means he’s doing exactly what he claims here that he isn’t.
Besides, who was it that came up with these images? They didn’t come from McCain supporters:
As far as I know, it wasn’t McCain that had women fainting at his feet in a series of campaign events. And McCain didn’t write the speech in which Obama claimed that his nomination was the moment “the oceans began to recede and the planet began to heal”:
Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth.
McCain didn’t invent Obama’s arrogance. He’s merely having a lot of fun pointing it out.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 Next »
Michael: Right! Now why don’t you go out the window with them and take your silly little “old time conservatism” cult with you.
jeanie on August 17, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Heh, thanks. Though from what I have read, you are doing a mighty fine job on your own.
The general problem that I see with people here is that they are comparing McCain to Obama instead of comparing him to what they should be comparing him: conservatism. People either believe in conservatism or they do not. And people either believe in this country or they do not. When I see someone say that our country is doomed if Obama wins the Presidency, it tells me that they don’t believe in conservatism and they don’t believe in America. Obama is not above America. No President is. But more and more I see so called conservatives saying that the end of America is coming based on Obama earning the White House. Well, if America can be destroyed by one man in the White House, we are not as great of a country as everyone says.
People who fear an Obama Presidency need to stop and think about that.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Washington Post:
So Alphie, no more bitching. Obama’s going to make Bush look like a miser. But don’t worry, healthcare will be free!
Chuck Schick on August 17, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Thank you, I know I am right.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 9:22 PM
You can’t handle the truth!
- Nathan Jessup
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 9:23 PM
Well, if America can be destroyed by one man in the White House, we are not as great of a country as everyone says.
Destroyed, no. Greatly harmed, yes. If a McCain nomination or election means the end of conservatism, if such a movement can be destroyed by one man in the White House, conservatism is not as great a movement as everyone says. It tells me that they don’t believe in conservatism and they don’t believe in America.
Nice game, kinda fun in a Boggle™ sort of way.
Bishop on August 17, 2008 at 9:24 PM
Don’t be so ad hominem, vacuous and whiny or some will think that you are in a mental recession.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 9:27 PM
Just got in from a beautiful Summer day at the beach………
………… so, what’t everyone been talking about?
Oh yeah, that’s right, after skimming through most of these posts……………. I almost forgot.
Seven Percent Solution on August 17, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Good, so I take it you are not one of the McCainiacs who are going around scaring everyone into voting for McCain, otherwise Obama will destroy the country. That’s good news. We need more people like that.
Or maybe you are just playing a game, ‘in a Boggle sort of way’, to try to win an online debate with me. Hopefully you are treating this in a little more serious manner.
Also, my point (and that of MB4) is that McCain can greatly harm this nation as well. My frustration with most McCain supporters is that they don’t understand that. They used to understand that, as short a time ago as last year. Somehow, a mere 12 months has washed all that from their memories.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 9:30 PM
wow such ‘logic’ how could one not vote for mccain!!
*snicker*
where is that list I requested?? having trouble finding it??
right4life on August 17, 2008 at 9:30 PM
Exactly. This is definitely the kind of persuasive debate and logic that will convince people that conservatism is the best for America. Vote for McCain or else you are nut who’s part of an anti-McCain cult! Brilliant.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 9:34 PM
I’m done voting for moderates. unless you are a rock-ribbed conservative, forget it.
right4life on August 17, 2008 at 9:35 PM
McCain offering up his latest wife as a contestant in a stripping contest didn’t convince you he’s a “Conservative” Michael?
If that didn’t do it, what would?
alphie on August 17, 2008 at 9:35 PM
Their exaggerated fear seems to have them mentally paralyzed and ready to accept anything with an (R) after it’s name, anything and some of them even want liberal democrat Lieberman as VP. I am afraid that some of them have gone quite mad.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 9:36 PM
Yes, that’s one of the problems with obsolete precepts such as “old time conservatism”. It is always sure it is right and that the rest of the world is “illogical”, because they don’t agree. Now, I would await your next clever argument, which will be the customary blend of insult and more of the same relentless rigidity but it would be a waste of my and eveyone elses time to read.But, I regret having given it this much attention.
jeanie on August 17, 2008 at 9:37 PM
yeah the bible talks about a time when the Lord will send a deluding influence…seems like He’s already done that. the amount of irrationality is scary.
right4life on August 17, 2008 at 9:38 PM
Sorry 7%, we’ll get right back on it.
We missed you…
Honestly!
J_Gocht on August 17, 2008 at 9:38 PM
please seek professional help.
right4life on August 17, 2008 at 9:38 PM
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 9:30 PM
You just managed to hit on a tactic used by probably every political campaign since Ushpia first went door to door in Ashur: “my opponent will make your life miserable”.
So now we have a choice between two guys who supposedly will make our lives miserable, and you’re busy telling me that McCain is to be feared and that Obama is no big deal. Either way, the nation will survive the next four years, so we need to ask ourselves: which candidate will be more amenable to conservative ideas and which won’t.
Is McCain perfect, no, and you won’t find me whitewashing his missteps (as I see them) but since my choice apparently boils down to either him or Obama, I choose McCain. He isn’t the greatest conservative candidate ever, that much is obvious, but Obama couldn’t be farther away from conservative ideals if he were surfing the gas clouds of the Horsehead Nebula.
Bishop on August 17, 2008 at 9:41 PM
Question now is…
J_Gocht on August 17, 2008 at 9:42 PM
right4life & MB4 & Michael in MI, et al.
I am no McCain apologist and I would say there are many (even on this site) that will vote for McCain because they are making a strategic choice. I opposed McCain and did not vote for him in the primary. His positions are far too close to that of Obama on many important issues for my taste. I believe he is one of the worst candidates the Republicans have fielded and he is likely to damage the party.
But at the end of the day I don’t see how electing Obama gets me any closer to the things I believe in. In fact, I believe that Obama’s initiatives over the next potentially 8 years are even worse than what McCain wants to do. What’s more, voting for Obama will make my family decidedly less secure as his foreign policy approach is one of appeasement and weakness.
I don’t believe we have the luxury of sacrificing four or eight years to teach Senator McCain a lesson or to help maintain the GOP brand (the brand argument was always weak to me). The stakes are too high and the truth is that eight years of Obama could be a game changer for the long run.
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 9:44 PM
So I take it you are pro-amnesty then. Explain to me the so-called major Conservative uprising in 2007 to stop Amnesty, which has now been completely made moot by the same people nominating the man who led the Amnesty legislation.
I take it you are also a Goracle acolyte and believe in global warming. Explain to me how conservatism is against the belief of man caused global warming and legislation based on such, yet so called conservatives just nominated a man who is leading the way in legislation to stop man caused global warming. Hell, he came here to Michigan and held up a sign saying we need to stop global warming.
Legislation based on these two issues is going to have the biggest drain on this nation’s economy in history. Forgive me for being insulting and having clever arguments, but I thought that conservatives stood for something. Stood on principle against lousy legislation. I guess not, if the one pushing that legislation has an (R) next to their name, huh?
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 9:46 PM
McCain offering up his latest wife?
alphie on Aug 17,2008 at 9:25PM.
alphie: Got proof?eh!
At least unicorn pransing Silky
admitted his debauchery and be-
sirchment of his wife,and has
padded his liberal resume’of
fornicating outside his marriage!
Screwing around on your wife is
a plus for the Democratic party!
canopfor on August 17, 2008 at 9:46 PM
perhaps with obama we’ll have a conservative republican congress that actually opposes him, as opposed to mccain, whom they’ll feel obligated to go along with as he bends over for uncle Keg (teddy)
right4life on August 17, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Um, wrong. If you read what I posted, I stated that McCain can do as much harm to the nation as Obama. But what McCain supporters are telling me is that Obama is to be feared and McCain is no big deal.
Neither are to be feared, and neither are to be praised. Both are very bad candidates who can both do a lot of harm to this nation. *That* is what people need to get through their partisan minds.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 9:49 PM
And what happens if you don’t have a conservative congress? You can bet your right cheek that Pelosi and Baracky will have a hotline created just for the legislation they would push, and there wouldn’t be a chance of stopping it. Not a chance.
Bishop on August 17, 2008 at 9:50 PM
right4life on August 17, 2008 at 8:25 PM
I think this is where you and I differ. I don’t believe that McCain’s election will destroy the conservative movement because it can’t be destroyed. The movement is not some set of disparate ideals cobbled together like the progressive movement. The conservative movement resides in our hearts and in our tradition. It can no more be eliminated by McCain’s election than will people like you and me change our views simply because of the White House occupant.
I agree that damage will be done and that there will be set backs with a McCain election but the damage will be codified by Obama where it will be merely encouraged by McCain. What McCain seeks to tear apart can more easily be rebuilt than what Obama seeks to put into law.
More importantly the security of the country and the sanctity of the unborn is threatened in devestating proportion by the election of Obama. I can’t see how to look past those two key issues.
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 9:53 PM
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 9:49 PM
And if you read what I posted, I stated that if your choice is between two people who can theoretically create the same damage, having a President McCain at least gives you the opportunity to bring him over to more conservative ideals. Obama would look straight at conservatives and say, “It ain’t happening”.
Like I said, you won’t find me whitewashing McCain’s mistakes but like it or not, he is what I have to work with this time around and he is leagues ahead of what Baracky can offer me.
Bishop on August 17, 2008 at 9:54 PM
#1: For ‘your taste’ perhaps. But their positions as they are objectively compared side by side – are not anywhere near close. Here is the words of a real wise man on this subject to contemplate: For those who see no difference between McCain and the two Democrats, this serves as a reminder that while McCain drifts to the middle on some issues, a large chasm exists between the nominees that will face off in November.
#2: I agree, he’s an awful choice to make, and I am dumbfounded as to why the republican primary voters overwhelmingly picked him. But they did. If only there was a better conservative to convince more to vote for him. That conservative never showed up.
#3: I don’t either. It will be quite the opposite, in fact. And some people want to minimize this to make their case more palatable. They keep coating their words and their candidate, Obama with sugar. And Obama is too much of a bitter pill to swallow.
wise_man on August 17, 2008 at 9:54 PM
I don’t think that is exactly what M-in-M said. Obama may be bad for the country, but McCain is bad for the country and bad for the Republican party (which is suppose to be the Conservative party). Obama might actually be good for the Republican party. There is precedent as Carter was good for the Republican party (which remember is suppose to be the Conservative party).
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 9:55 PM
lol.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 9:56 PM
J_Gocht on August 17, 2008 at 9:13 PM
Please address the content of my posts or contribute something of value to the discussion. It’s hard to take you seriously if you simply nip at my heels. I can’t for the life of me figure out what your post was intended to say. If you have nothing to add other than malice then please direct it to someone else. I have not behaved that way toward you so please show me the same courtesy.
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 9:57 PM
Olde soldier sends…!
J_Gocht on August 17, 2008 at 9:58 PM
My worry for months has been based on the talk of so called conservatives who say that it is basically either McCain or bust. What that tells me is that these so called conservatives are putting everything into the Presidential election and if Obama wins, they will become like those people who needed professional help after President Bush won in 2004. Or they won’t be that bad, but they will simply give up on this nation and on being active in politics, because they felt it was all or nothing in the general election.
That is wrong.
This election is not the be all, end all. If Obama wins, the country will go on. Might be worse, might be the same. Heck, might be better somehow. None of us know. However, this fatalistic attitude among so called conservatives that McCain has to win otherwise we are doomed is pathetic. It sounds like what I heard from the Left prior to 2004. I thought it was pathetic coming from the Left and I think it is pathetic coming from the Right as well.
This isn’t about ‘teaching Senator McCain a lesson’. This is about the nation. This is about what is best for the country in the near future and the distant future.
The point that people seem to be missing is that this isn’t about two men, this is about ideology and what is best for America. Americans shouldn’t support Presidents or Senators or Congressmen, they should support their city, their State and their Nation above all. Presidents will come and go. They will either help or harm the nation in small or large ways. What makes this country continue on is its people.
Thus, the important thing is not to support a candidate, but to support an ideology. Support principles and values. Our politicians are a reflection of the values or lack of values of the American public. Thus, Obama and McCain being poor candidates is a testament to our society being a poor society that needs education, needs inspiration and needs to be reminded of what makes this nation great.
Obama doesn’t make this nation great. McCain doesn’t make it great. The ideals and values and principles of this nation and the American people who uphold and stick to those ideals and values and principles make this country great decade after decade, generation after generation.
My problem is reading people put their faith in politicians and political parties instead of the ideals and values and principles of this nation.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 10:00 PM
“What’s this?” thought John McCain. “I can feel nothing warmer at all! That is terrible. Am I stupid? Am I a flat-earther? Am I a denier? Am I not fit to be President? That would be the most dreadful thing that could happen to me. “Oh, it is very hot!” McCain said aloud. “It has my highest approbation.” And McCain nodded in a contented way, and gazed outside, for he would not say that he felt no Global Warming. The whole entourage that he had with him looked and looked, and felt no warming, any more than the rest; but, like John McCain, they said, “It is so warm!” and counseled him to always say that he felt warm when he was out in public. “It is warm, hot even!” went from mouth to mouth. On all sides there seemed to be general warming, and John McCain gave Al Gore the title of Imperial Master of Global Warming Science.
So John McCain went in procession, and every one in the streets said, “How incomparable warm it is! What a warm day it is!” No one would let it be perceived that he could not feel warming, for that would have shown that he was not fit for his office, or was very stupid or a flat-earther or a denier. No day of John McCain’s had ever been as warm as this one.
“But I’m freezing my a$$ off out here!” a little child cried out at last. “Just hear what that innocent says!” said the father: and one whispered to another what the child had said. “But it is cold out here!” said the whole people at length. That touched John McCain, for it seemed to him that they were right; but the thought within himself was, “I must go through with feeling all the Global Warming. I do not dare to do otherwise” And so he held himself a little higher, and his aides held on tighter than ever, and proclaimed the Global Warming which did not exist at all.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:02 PM
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 9:55 PM
This isn’t 1979 anymore, not with 911 behind us and a nuclear Iran if front.
You can hope and pray that somehow Obama will unite conservatives, meanwhile he is giving away the farm and you are dreaming of the return of Reagan while sitting in gas lines. McCain ain’t perfect but Obama is a disaster of epic proportions.
Bishop on August 17, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Right, and this will be different in a McCain Administration how? McCain has done nothing for the last 8 years, but make deals with Democrat Party (save for his stance on the ’surge’) to push liberal policies. I see him doing the same as President, including compromising on Supreme Court Justices. I don’t see him fighting for Justices in the mold of Alito or Roberts, as President Bush did. I also don’t see him fighting against the Fairness Doctrine, considering he has no love for talk radio. And then of course there is Amnesty and his global warming legislation. And I expect him to make some compromises to push through universal healthcare.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Come November, they should have all their guns in a bank vault somewhere and they would also be prudent to have lots of booze stocked up for sure. Also plenty of pepsid and I pity their dog if they decide to take it out on him. Ain’t goin’ to be pretty for sure.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:08 PM
Thus, the important thing is not to support a candidate, but to support an ideology.
Which goes precisely how far? Pro-choice conservatives, pro-life liberals, porkified pols from both parties. You can name rock-ribbed conservatives or liberals on the fingers of one hand yet we are supposed to hold true to ideology, regardless of cost?
McCain isn’t one of those rock-ribbers, he is what we have to work with this year and the awareness of what an Obama presidency could do trumps my pining for the return of Ronnie.
Bishop on August 17, 2008 at 10:09 PM
wise_man on August 17, 2008 at 9:54 PM
It sounds like I am closer to your view on McCain. As I said I will vote for McCain but it wasn’t an easy process for me to get there. I had to come to terms with his many betrayals of the party and his many terrible positions. But I agree that despite his positions on many issues, even the ones I disagree with are closer to the center than are those of Obama. Would you say that I understand what you are saying?
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Oh, good point!
George Will’s question for McKoolaid drinkers -
The more McCain talks — about wicked “speculators,” about how he reveres ANWR as much as the Grand Canyon, about adjusting the planet’s thermostat, etc. — the more conservatives cling to judicial nominees as a reason for supporting him. But now another portion of his signature legislation has been repudiated by the court as an affront to the First Amendment, and again Roberts and Alito have joined the repudiation. Yet McCain promises to nominate jurists like them. Is that believable?
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:12 PM
You still gotta pick one. Which one? Why?
JiangxiDad on August 17, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Conjecture in regards to McCain, pure reality for Obama. Bush put in two great justices, yep, after first offering up Harriet Myers and he hasn’t exactly been stellar in other areas that conservatives care about. I’m not so sure that comparing McCain to Bush is such a great idea.
After November you can trot out the bullhorn and pronounce that you stood firm on ideals, meanwhile Baracky is busy taxing you into the ground and proclaiming that a nuclear-armed Iran is actually a good thing for the world. Then in 2012 we get back control of the WH and try to figure out how in hell we repeal universal heathcare.
Bishop on August 17, 2008 at 10:15 PM
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 10:00 PM
I thought you made some valuable points in your post and I agree with you about what makes the country great. I also am not trying to be overly fatalistic but I believe that having a Commander in Chief as weak as Obama is dangerous for the country. Maybe the impact will be negligible and maybe we wouldn’t even understand the damage until many years later as with Carter.
Do you plan to vote for Obama or are you going to sit it out? The reason I ask is because of your point about competing ideologies. If by inaction or because of actions you took, Obama was elected do you think that would be a better representation of your ideals because you stood by them and prevented someone like McCain from being elected?
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 10:17 PM
McCain has shown he will cave to pressure from the right when they are his only financial hope.
Obama is trying to play the middle for suckers while raking in huge pay from the most invested left.
It’s ultimately all about the money.
We need more solidarity on the right and these last two years we have burned the telephone lines. It is starting to work.
Beto Ochoa on August 17, 2008 at 10:17 PM
Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?
-
GrouchoJohn McCainMB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:18 PM
Will it help to buy more beer?
JiangxiDad on August 17, 2008 at 10:18 PM
Well, you’ll feel better for short periods of time.
Beto Ochoa on August 17, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Gosh Doc, it is never my intent to attack either the veracity or the personality of any poster on this blog.
My rag was with the third party, one David Limbaugh, whom you quoted as being a very astute judge of politics and human nature, by observing…
“Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”
Perhaps Mr. Limbaugh should have provided attribution to Voltaire; so you Sir, could have quoted Voltaire instead of the usurper Limbaugh.
All my best!
J_Gocht on August 17, 2008 at 10:21 PM
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:12 PM
I don’t think I know your idea for a solution. I apologize if I missed it but are you planning to vote for Obama or just sit it out? Just curious.
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 10:22 PM
As I stated earlier, our nominees are a reflection of the American public. Obama is a reflection of the Left and McCain is a reflection of the Right. Obama is as Left as Left can go and McCain is as squishy and mavericky as one can get. Chalk that up to conservatives always compromising for ‘pragmatism’ over principles and values. Meanwhile Obama is the result of the Left demanding a candidate who is Liberal. And now they have him.
No modern day Ronald Reagan is going to emerge if the modern day Reagan doesn’t believe the country is ‘pining’ for a man of conservative values. Conservatives keep telling government that they are willing to compromise compromise compromise, thus we end up getting Republicans who compromise their values and principles and won’t stand up for what is right. The best we get is some stunt over oil drilling that accomplished absolutely nothing. Prior to that, they did nothing, except spend spend spend and refuse to stand up to the Democrats or get their message of conservative governing out to the American people.
Government reflects the People. If the People don’t demand a conservative, none will show.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 10:23 PM
I understand completely what your position is. I’m not trying to say that you are wrong, just wanted to mention that in an analytical study of his positions and votes, that McCain and Obama are quite far apart. If McCain was as close to Obama, then Obama supporters could vote for either. They obviously hate McCain, and want him to loose. And Obama to win.
Obama is far left, and wants the undecided moderates in America to see him as center. McCain is right of every single democrat. Only Lieberman (who was kicked out of the party and is now an independent,) is the closest to McCain, But not really that close, I would think. And Lieberman is still a democrat at heart.
For the people who want to punish McCain because he reaches across the isle. He’s A “RINO,” right? And that’s bad. Right?
I wonder how they rationalize their own positions now. Because they want McCain to loose. And the only possible result will be a democrat win. How in the hell is this not being a conservative in name only when they know the direct results of their own actions.
Punish McCain for doing things that make democrats happy … by helping a democrat to win over McCain …. which make democrats happy. But yet they accept this and want this to happen. No problem with that whatsoever. Seems like a mental disorder. Or a political derangement.
It makes you wonder.
wise_man on August 17, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Two new McCain bumper stickers designed by Hotair McCainiacs ltd.
Vote McCain or Obama will kill you and eat your children.
Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes? Vote McCain.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Actually, I don’t have to pick one.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 10:24 PM
Well I will be “sitting it out” as in my state it is all vote by mail. If I had to go to a polling place I probably would not bother voting. I will probably vote for Bob Barr if he is on the ballot even though I don’t know much about him other than he is not McCain nor is he Obama, and that’s in his favor right there. Or maybe I will write in Barry Goldwater.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:28 PM
Some are of the belief that the GOP pushed McCain on the people. The republican voters ended up voting for McCain over all other conservatives. If anyone wants to believe that the democrats did this, then the only ‘proof’ there is, is the daily kos advocating voter fraud where he wanted his minions to vote for Romney in michigan. These people remind me of truthers.
And, they think that if McCain is elected, that this will somehow result in the destruction of the republican party and conservatism …. because McCain hates conservatives. So they don’t want to allow McCain to win, because they don’t want to reward anyone who is not a conservative.
What I don’t understand, is their “tooth fairy” like belief that – by magic, if Obama is elected, that the next republican primary winner will be conservative. And they offer no proof. It’s as if this is supposed to happen by magic. The fact is, that as you say – the people who voted did not demand a conservative. there were a few good conservatives to choose from. Fred, Rudy, as examples.
If their cunning plan to throw the 2008 election in the hopes that a more conservative president, maybe even the next Reagan emerges, then thats a pretty sweet deal. I’d be all for this if there was some chance that this would happen, and that we aren’t going to get 8 years of Obama and company. When this planof theirs relys on fair dust from tinkerbell, to make it happen (i.e. it;s not based in any fact whatsoever, just their feeling that they want it to happen) then I’d rather rely on a plan that is grounded in fact.
It’s too bad that they don’t.
wise_man on August 17, 2008 at 10:31 PM
What makes you believe McCain will not…
…institute universal healthcare?
…raise taxes on the oil industry?
…raise taxes on “the rich”?
…institute his high tax global warming legislation?
…institute the Fairness Doctrine?
This is what I am getting at. I’m not arguing against Obama harming the nation. I am arguing that there is no guarantee that McCain won’t do just as much harm. The fact that people don’t see to see that worries me more. Because if Obama wins, people will be (hopefully) fired up to stop the Democrats. However, it seems that people are putting full faith in McCain to be just hunky dory. So really, it seems a McCain win would be more dangerous for America, since most people would go back to sleep thinking they elected a Republican, when, in fact, they elected a liberal Democrat who is only less liberal than Obama.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 10:32 PM
Great bumper sticker:
Vote for Bob Barr! I don’t know who he is, but he’s not TRAITOR McAmnesty!!!
wise_man on August 17, 2008 at 10:33 PM
wise_man on August 17, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Well put and the situation is a conundrum. It is truly amazing to see the result of McCain’s betrayals on many of the party faithful. He has inspired such resentment that I believe that there are people who are actually considering voting against their own best interest just to prevent him from becoming POTUS. McCain has not only angered conservatives but seems to have gone out of his way poke them in the eye over the years.
His behavior made it hard for me to finally say I was going to vote for him. In fact, for months I was saying “I don’t care what happens. I will not vote for him.” I felt comfortable knowing that McCain would win anyway in Utah but it still didn’t absolve me of my responsibility.
I have a duty to help put McCain in office even though he doesn’t deserve it. Of the two choices he is the one least likely to get my wife and kids killed. There are a wealth of other reasons that I eventually came to reconcile but between McCain and Obama “I want McCain on that wall. I need McCain on that wall.” :) – A Few Good Men/
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Bob Barr would repeal the Patriot Act…!
Does that tickle your fancy like it does mine!
We’d be able to write letters to the non existent editors again!
Oh well we’d still have HA?
J_Gocht on August 17, 2008 at 10:39 PM
Interesting question. It sends me back to the days of the GOP Primaries when all I heard from so called conservatives was “I support Fred Thompson/Duncan Hunter, but McCain/Romney/Huckabee are winning and leading in the polls and the polls say they have the best chance to win the general, so I am voting for McCain/Romney/Huckabee”. If I had a $1 for every person I heard/read state that…
Anyway, to answer your question, I will probably either not vote for the Presidential candidate (I’m voting to re-elect my Congressman, though, Thaddeus McCotter) or write-in someone. Do I advocate anyone else do that? No. I advocate what I have been since the Primaries: vote for whomever you believe will best represent you. I have been aggravated with the people who have been voting based on polls or “he has the best chance to defeat Hillary” or whatever other shallow reason.
Also, if Obama is elected, as I said, I don’t plan to just say ‘ah f*** it, I give up, the country is doomed’. I’m going to get up in the morning, go to work and go on living my life and staying active in politics and discussing values and ideals with people and hoping to inform and educate people and encourage and inspire them to stay informed and educated. If McCain is elected, I will do the same thing.
Michael in MI on August 17, 2008 at 10:42 PM
J_Gocht on August 17, 2008 at 10:39 PM
My question could sound snide but it is not meant to be. (Especially since I read you the riot act about a previous comment that I apparently misconstrued – sorry about that.) I am interested to know if you have noticed a change (any at all) in your life since the Patriot Act was enacted? I have heard that it has negatively impacted a lot of peoples’ lives but I may just be one of the few it hasn’t. I’m curious to know how it has impacted your life or the lives of people you know. Thanks
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 10:44 PM
The difference is that if someone gave me a bumper sticker like the ones I came up with, I might well put them on my car. Would you put yours on your car?
Why do you call McCain a traitor? I thought that you were trying to, other than your “big slip”, trying to convince people that your were really a big supporter of his.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:47 PM
Well I will tell you this much, I have never liked the name much. I am always suspicious that people may be up to something when they use such extremely aggrandizing titles for something. Like American Civil Liberties Union or Americans for Democratic Action or The Fair Tax or The Patriot Act.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:54 PM
Got Proof?
J_Gocht on Aug 17,2008 at 9:58PM.
J_Gocht: Ummmm,it was a Harley Davidson sponsered Beauty
Contest,not a pole or erotic strippers!
That must be some leap of Liberal faith to put
the beauty contest the same as a stipper venue!
If a beauty contest is viewed as strippers,then
thats kinda the same opinion as the Taliban!
canopfor on August 17, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Canopfor, you must not have seen the same pictures of those “events” as I did. Trust me, they were not exactly wearing burkas! No sirey!
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 11:02 PM
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 10:54 PM
Did you see the question I posted to J_Gocht? I’ll pose it to you as well because I am interested to know if you have noticed a change (any at all) in your life since the Patriot Act was enacted? I have heard that it has negatively impacted a lot of peoples’ lives but I may just be one of the few it hasn’t. I’m curious to know how it has impacted your life or the lives of people you know.
As I said with J_Gocht I’m not trying to be snide, just curious. Thanks.
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 11:03 PM
Two terms come to mind Doc.
Interpolation, mathematical and in defilade, military.
Best I can describe.
J_Gocht on August 17, 2008 at 11:07 PM
Canopfor No Sirey!
MB4 on Aug 17,2008 at 11:02PM.
MB4: Well, all I saw was bikini’s(and women out there
forgive me)but MB,I didn’t see any wearing a cork
and two baby band-aids that alphie claimed!:)
canopfor on August 17, 2008 at 11:14 PM
No, Mike this thread and many others are about the upcoming election, where the ONLY relevant comparison is comparing McCain to Obama. You can’t be dumb enough to not comprehend that
One of the two will be POTUS–so, yes, we compare them. That’s what an election is, genius
Janos Hunyadi on August 17, 2008 at 11:21 PM
Youtube doesn’t allow nudity, cano.
And what an odd description of Cindy McCain.
alphie on August 17, 2008 at 11:24 PM
No. and I haven’t noticed any change in my life since the all out sons-of-#itches, barbarians, and chronic drunks with no regard for human life, otherwise known as the Russians, invaded Georgia either, well other than I shoot my mouth off a little more on hotair.
I don’t know all that much about all the particulars of The Patriot Act, I suspect that some parts I would be for and some parts I would be against, I just know that I am suspicious whenever such extremely aggrandizing names are used, names that imply that those who aren’t fully for it all must be the opposite of what the name is. I don’t tend to trust people that much who do that.
Just like the name American Civil Liberties Union implies that if you are not for all they do you must be an un-American against liberty, likewise The Patriot Act implies that if you are not for all of it then you must be unpatriotic.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 11:27 PM
What I saw online some days ago, I just looked and can’t find it, was somewhere in the middle.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 11:32 PM
J_Gocht on August 17, 2008 at 11:07 PM
Those are some awful big words for simple man like me. Does your answer mean you don’t have any personal examples or know anyone who does but you are sure there are because of the way the law is constructed?
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 11:33 PM
So if you had to choose between a Stalin and a Hitler, whom would you choose? Not that either McCain or Obama is like them, but if the “issue” is suppose to be if you have “only two choices” right now you somehow must choose one or the other.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 11:36 PM
I remember that one!
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 11:39 PM
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Or…another good analogy. What if you had to choose between a ham sandwich and a box of live hamsters? That may help.
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 11:40 PM
Or what if you had to choose between a robot with a human brain and 41 bottle rockets that when exploded released Lucky Charms cereal. That’s probably a better analogy.
Mormon Doc on August 17, 2008 at 11:42 PM
Well I’m not sure that I get that one at all as I would of course, not being a Michael Vick or a Ted Nugent type, choose the ham sandwich.
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 11:48 PM
I don’t get that one either. Maybe I have had too much too drink? No, I haven’t even started yet. Maybe I should.
Do you plan on driving to work tomorrow or are you planing on bringing you lunch?
MB4 on August 17, 2008 at 11:51 PM
Great question Doc. Congress has passed and the President has signed into law the Patriot Act that affects all of us, yet we don’t have a damn clue as to how it has usurped our freedoms?
Hence the mathematical term “interpolation”; which may literally be defined as we must read between the lines or the numbers?
Extensive interpolation is required!
As for the military term “in defilade”; it is a term that is used to define a target that cannot be defined since it’s hidden behind a masking screen such as a ridgeline or hill.
Additional research and observation will be required to adequately define the target.
Your initial question remains truly a conundrum… My mind swirled in confusion as I rode through freezing wind and the blowing snow just a short mile from Fargo and home…
J_Gocht on August 18, 2008 at 12:14 AM
I’ll take third watch, Sir!
J_Gocht on August 18, 2008 at 12:24 AM
One point keeps confusing me, and that is the insistence of many strong conservatives that electing Obama will be more beneficial to the Republican Party than electing McCain. Now, these people necessarily hold these two axioms to be true:
1. McCain is too far left for strong conservatives to accept, even if Obama is farther left.
2. Obama will not do significantly more damage to the country during his term than McCain would.
These two statements must be true because if the first is false, then these conservatives would vote for McCain because they could accept his values, and if the second is false, then they’d vote for McCain because they felt he would be significantly better for the country than Obama (and country trumps party).
So, if McCain gets elected with his too-far-left platform and lives up to it, he damages the country significantly or insignificantly with his liberal policies. If Obama gets elected, the same thing happens.
Now, the crucial question: why would conservatives benefit more if it were Obama’s liberal policies doing the damage rather than McCain’s? After all, if it’s the liberalism that the country would be reacting against, and (as we’ve already established) Obama’s liberalism wouldn’t do significantly more damage than McCain’s, there doesn’t seem to be a reason why Obama’s liberalism would generate a larger reaction from the right than McCain’s liberalism.
In fact, it seems to me that the opposite would be true, at least in the next election sequence. In the primaries 4 years from now, if Obama had been elected and damaged the country by going left, the Republicans don’t need to differ from Obama as much in the general, because they already represent change by virtue of being a different party. On the other hand, if McCain were elected, his opponents in the primaries would have to differ from him significantly in order to show voters that they represented a new direction.
So, in summary, the rationale of “Obama would make the Republicans more conservative than McCain would” doesn’t make sense to me, even if I accept that McCain’s too far left AND that he wouldn’t be much better for the country than Obama.
Math_Mage on August 18, 2008 at 12:55 AM
The Democrats ruled Congress for 60+ years after Hoover, Math_Mage.
McCain could screw up America worse than Hoover…do the math.
alphie on August 18, 2008 at 1:05 AM
If you can interpolate your loss of freedom, what known values are you basing your estimate on and why can’t you read a summary of the Act to get an exact value for the loss?
If your search for any changes in your life since the Patriot Act was enacted came back with “in defilade” (which, from your extended definition, I take in this instance to mean “further analysis required”), does that mean that you have not, in fact, noticed any such changes in your life? Because that was what Mormon Doc was asking.
Your answer serves only to confuse and obscure, whether or not that was the intention. I’m not involved in this particular debate, but I find rhetorical obfuscation distasteful. If you meant “no, but I haven’t really looked for any,” then say so.
Math_Mage on August 18, 2008 at 1:15 AM
Your geniuses running Congress became the most unpopular Congress in under 6 months.
They now have a 9% approval rating. A NINE.
Whatever the Congress was made of those 60 years is now gone.
Chuck Schick on August 18, 2008 at 1:22 AM
The Democrats are still going to gain seats in both Houses of Congress(maybe even a filibuster-proof 60 in the Senate)this November, Chuck.
That’s how much Americans hate the Republicans these days…
alphie on August 18, 2008 at 1:24 AM
Correlation != causation. And that “60 years” is actually broken up into two blocks: one during Roosevelt’s presidency, and another starting about 10 years after Roosevelt’s death when Eisenhower started his second term. The intervening 10 years saw no dominating party in Congress, with control swaying back and forth between the Democrats and the Republicans, and so the second block cannot simply be blamed on Hoover and left at that.
Math_Mage on August 18, 2008 at 1:24 AM
I don’t know… but obviously you’re comfortable with me making the the decision for you, otherwise you’d vote.
Chuck Schick on August 18, 2008 at 1:24 AM
Ah but you see most swing voters, scratch just the right acting with only support from the right, would associate bad things not so much with liberalism v. conservatism, but rather with whether the bad things happened under a Democrat or a Republican President.
MB4 on August 18, 2008 at 1:26 AM
If you were a Republican congressman would you be more likely to vote against and criticize a Republican President or a Democrat President?
MB4 on August 18, 2008 at 1:28 AM
Don’t drink all the beer like you did last time Sarge!
MB4 on August 18, 2008 at 1:29 AM
Trust me on this one or not, you ain’t decidin’ this election.
MB4 on August 18, 2008 at 1:30 AM
With a 9% approval rating, I wouldnt be making too many long term plans there, kids. Especially when you guys set the deficit record next year.
Chuck Schick on August 18, 2008 at 1:35 AM
Could be
MB4 on August 18, 2008 at 1:36 AM
Admirable of you. However, please don’t try to imply that Republicans who say Obama would be significantly worse for the country than McCain are “fatalistic” and/or will give up if Obama is elected. They’re fighting for your values, same as you, and they will continue to fight for their values whoever is elected, same as you. They simply believe that McCain represents their values better than Obama, and they’re willing to go with a bad choice because they think he’s less bad than the alternative.
Math_Mage on August 18, 2008 at 1:40 AM
Not me personally, but whether or not you get Stalin or Hitler isnt up to you anymore. It’s up to all of us who you think are idiots for voting.
And your example is pretty specious. Choosing between the least of 2 known mass murderers is a little different than choosing between 2 men you have only best guesses as to what they will do in power.
Chuck Schick on August 18, 2008 at 1:40 AM
A very good way to keep getting bad choices. I can’t think of any better way actually.
MB4 on August 18, 2008 at 1:43 AM
It’s a lot different as I made clear in my question. The “issue” was does one somehow have to choose between two unacceptable choices, not how unacceptable they were.
MB4 on August 18, 2008 at 1:46 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 Next »