The comprehensive argument against Barack Obama

posted at 11:59 pm on October 21, 2008 by Ed Morrissey


A Roadmap for Campaign 2008’s Homestretch

By Guy Benson ( and Mary Katharine Ham (

Editor and Contributor, Ed Morrissey


Allow us to put our cards on the table at the outset: We are two young conservative journalists—both in our 20s. Unlike many of our peers, we are not swept up in Obamamania and would prefer John McCain to win the election. We’ve teamed up with seasoned blogger extraordinaire, Ed Morrissey, whose careful and thoughtful pursuit of the truth—even when it benefits his political opponents—is respected across the blogosphere. In that spirit, we are not at all interested in perpetuating lies, rumors, and innuendo about Barack Obama. Promoting such information does America a disservice, allows Obama’s supporters to justifiably cry “smear,” and damages our own credibility.

What follows is by no means comprehensive, but it does shed some much-needed light on a number of Obama’s positions, statements, and associations about which he has been less than honest. We’ve attempted to boil each issue down to a succinct explanation with an accompanying, brief video clip—often starring Barack Obama in his own words. Before pulling the lever for someone who hopes voters will ignore his paper-thin resume, unsavory associations, and hard-left voting record, each citizen has a duty to do his due diligence.

In short, we hope this “closing argument” is compelling and clear, and we encourage you to share this essay with undecided or wavering family members, friends, and co-workers.


If recent polls are to believed, freshman Senator Barack Obama has a better than average chance of becoming America’s 44th President, the Commander-in-Chief of the planet’s most powerful military, and the proverbial leader of the free world. It’s worth mentioning that just four years ago as President Bush and Senator John Kerry were vying for the White House, Obama was still a part-time State Senator representing a liberal district in Chicago. Before that he was an attorney and, famously, a community organizer. In 2008, Obama has positioned himself as a post-partisan, thoughtful moderate with the superior judgment required to lead the country. These are lofty promises from a man with precious little executive experience, and a Senate career that lasted exactly 143 legislative days before he launched yet another campaign for higher office. No one can deny his ambition. In fact, if Obama wins on November 4th—and serves one full term in the Oval Office—the Presidency of the United States would be the longest consecutively held full-time job he has ever held without seeking another.

Barack Obama promises “change,” which is an appealing concept to an American public weary of a beleaguered administration and worried about the future. They are faced with a candidate who promises them everything: Tax cuts for 95% of Americans, universal healthcare, peace, saving the planet, and—according to his wife—the “healing” of Americans’ souls. As the saying goes, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Questions abound: Is this man prepared to be president? Does he hold mainstream values and policy preferences? Who has influenced his thinking, and where does he want to take the country? Has he been honest with the people from whom he seeks votes?


Barack Obama is out of the political mainstream on abortion. Don’t take our word for it, just listen to Sen. Obama’s own statements. In his final debate with John McCain, Obama asserted that “nobody is pro-abortion.” If you don’t have the time to read Princeton University professor Robert P. George’s detailed argument that Obama may actually fit that description, consider the candidate’s own record. In the clips below, you will hear Obama say three things.

First, he tells an audience that if his own daughters experienced an unexpected teen pregnancy, he wouldn’t want them “punished with a baby.”

Second, he pledges to a Planned Parenthood gathering that the very first thing he’d do as president is sign the Freedom Of Choice Act, which—according to the bill’s own supporters — would abolish bans on partial-birth abortion and parental notification laws nationwide while implementing tax-payer funded abortions. All three positions are wildly unpopular with the vast majority of Americans, yet they are Obama’s top priorities—just ask him:

Finally, Obama argues against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act as an Illinois Senator in 2002. Despite Obama’s protestations otherwise, he voted three separate times against this legislation, which was designed to require life-saving care for infants who survive botched abortions. This is a matter of record. Not only did an identical bill pass Congress without a single dissenting vote, the explanation Obama has offered for years to defend these votes has been exposed as a lie. Furthermore, Hot Air has a long list of supporting posts on this very subject:

Listen to Obama complain that providing care to these accidentally-born infants would place an undue burden on the woman and her abortionist:

Americans of good faith are divided on this issue. Many are pro-life, and many are pro-choice. Obama’s extreme record should horrify the former group, and should even give significant pause to the latter. Ask yourself, are babies “punishment”? Would you vote for the Freedom of Choice Act and against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act…three times?


As a skilled rhetorical magician, Obama presents himself as a tax-cutter. Even though he’s voted dozens of times to raise taxes, he assures Americans that 95% of us will have our taxes slashed under his plan. The Wall Street Journal isn’t buying it. Once again, though, the best way to assess someone’s positions is to listen to his own language. Note the two telling exchanges that follow:

First, Obama tells newly-minted national celebrity “Joe the Plumber” that his tax hikes on the so-called rich are designed to “spread the wealth around,” which Obama explains is “good for everybody.” Does that sound like a genuine tax-cutter to you?

Second, Obama is challenged by ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson at a primary debate in Pennsylvania. Gibson asks Obama why he insists on raising capital gains taxes (which affect millions of American investors) even after history has proven that raising said taxes actually decreases government revenues from the taxes, and cutting capital gains taxes actually brings more revenue into federal coffers. Obama has no answer, other than to blow off all the evidence, and say that raising taxes is the fair thing to do—practical consequences be damned.

Someone so obsessed with the concept of “fairness” is unlikely to be a friend to taxpayers. Obama’s record over his brief legislative career confirms his tax-and-spend impulses.


Barack Obama does not want anyone talking about his radical associations. He’s even sought criminal prosecutions against those who have dared to speak out on issues that make him squirm. Average Americans are judged by the company they keep, and our leaders ought to be held to the same standard.

Even though Obama says the issue is resolved (and John McCain refuses to raise it) voters must consider the case of Jeremiah Wright. Think of it this way: Barack Obama has himself estimated that he attends church twice a month. He spent twenty years at Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ under the leadership of Rev. Wright. Within this metric, a rough calculation concludes that Obama sat through approximately 500 sermons at that church. 500. Still, he claims he never heard outrageous, racist, or anti-American comments from the pulpit. Watch the following clips—you probably saw them back when this controversy erupted—and ask yourself if you believe Obama’s self-serving selective deafness. The man featured in these clips is the same man who performed Obama’s wedding and baptized his children. Notice that his unhinged rantings did not elicit stunned silence from his congregation, but approving cheers. Is Obama’s “this isn’t the Jeremiah Wright I once knew” a credible excuse? Can you imagine anything like this being said at your church or house of worship—much less applauded?

Bill Ayers is another name many Americans have heard by now. He is a former terrorist who detonated bombs at federal buildings and plotted to blow up an army dance at Ft. Dix, New Jersey. He remains proud of his actions, and only regrets not having bombed more. Obama has been personal and professional friends with Ayers for more than a dozen years. When confronted with this association, Obama has said Ayers is (a) just a guy in his neighborhood, (b) a local professor, and (c) someone with whom he’d served on a charitable board. These are all true statements, but they obfuscate a much deeper relationship about which Obama is not being honest. In fact, the two served together on two boards—The Woods Fund and the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, where together they funneled huge sums of money to a who’s-who leftwing causes. Obama’s 1995 political coming-out party took place in the home of Ayers and his wife, a fellow unrepentant terrorist. Obama now denies this, but it’s a matter of record, confirmed by individuals who attended the party. Investigative journalist and Ethics and Public Policy Center Fellow, Stanley Kurtz, has written many thorough and indispensable articles on Obama’s substantial ties to Ayers. If you don’t have time to read them, consider the following videos.

First, CNN looks into Bill Ayers and the Obama connection. The report concludes that “the relationship between Obama and Ayers went much deeper, ran much longer, and was much more political than Obama says.” It also confirms the 1995 political party Ayers hosted for Obama.

Second, Obama repeatedly states that Ayers’ violence took place 40 years ago when he was just eight years old. This is true, and it’s irrelevant. Would you shake hands with, let alone work comfortably with, someone who bombed the US Capitol and Pentagon, and remains proud that he did so? It is implausible that Obama didn’t know about Ayers’ sordid past, just as it’s implausible that he was unaware that Ayers’ hatred of this country continues to fester to this day. The following video features a 1998 ABC News interview with Ayers and his wife that showcases their continued defiance. It also portrays Ayers at a 1960s radical reunion just last year during which he describes the United States as he sees it today. Why did Obama feel comfortable around these people, and is it any wonder that he’s been less than forthcoming about their relationship?

ACORN is a community organization whose fraudulent voter registration activities have drawn indictments and investigations in more than a dozen states. Their intimidation tactics in the 1990s forced banks into issuing unwise mortgage loans to low-income individuals, setting the stage for the recent mortgage crisis that send the economy into a tailspin. Barack Obama has denied any connection to ACORN beyond performing some minimal legal work on their behalf in the distant past. Once again, this is an intentionally misleading understatement. As it turns out, Obama was a top ACORN activism trainer for several years. The charitable boards he and Ayers controlled funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to ACORN. His campaign paid ACORN more than $800,000 to register voters in the primary, but tried to disguise the purpose of those spent dollars in official expense reports. He’s since scrubbed his “fight the smears” website after these untruths were exposed.

This is a complicated issue, so it plays into Obama’s hands: Team Obama’s gameplan of spinning half-truths and muddying the water is in full effect as he tries to “run out the clock” on the election. Although Stanley Kurtz did the heavy lifting , syndicated columnist Mona Charen’s explanation summed up the issue quite well: Putting Obama in charge of cleaning up the mortgage mess would be akin to hiring an arsonist to put out a fire.

As we mentioned above, the Obama/ACORN nexus does not lend itself to quick and easy videos. Nonetheless, two stand out: CNN—not the other cable news channel Obama ritually bashes—filed an investigative report on Obama’s ties to ACORN, and once again found Obama’s explanation wanting. In addition, the McCain campaign produced perhaps the best succinct summary of Obama’s ties to ACORN in a 90 second web ad, the details of which have not been disputed. Watch and decide for yourself:

For fear of lingering too long on the “associates” question, we will refrain from exploring the convicted felonwho helped Obama buy his Hyde Park mansion.

Remember, though, these issues are “distractions.” Nothing to see here, folks.


Barack Obama gained much of his early traction by speaking out against the war in Iraq. He cites his initial opposition to the war as the crown-jewel example of his judgment on foreign affairs. Although many people credit him for being “right” on the war from the beginning, it’s indisputable that he did not have an actual vote on the war resolution. As a state senator from a liberal, antiwar district, one wonders how much political risk he assumed by speaking out against a Republican-led conflict. Regardless, after he was elected to the US Senate, Obama was faced with an actual vote on a controversial issue: The surge. John McCain and others said the strategy was the only way to salvage the war and recover from our missteps there. History has proven them correct. Obama not only opposed the surge, but actually predicted it would make matters worse. In other words, he was spectacularly wrong on his biggest foreign policy judgment call since joining the Senate. He stubbornly refuses to admit he was wrong. This may be the kind of judgment that’s expected from a partisan rookie Senator, but not a Commander-in-Chief:

During the CNN-YouTube debate in the summer of 2007, Obama unequivocally promised to meet without preconditions with the rogue leaders of America’s worst enemies—all within the first year of his administration. Hillary Clinton and John McCain have called this approach reckless, expressing concerns that Obama may be playing into our enemies’ propagandistic designs. In October 2008, the Iranian government announced its own preconditions for one-on-one meetings with the Unites States: Pull all US troops out of the Middle East, and abandon support for “Zionist” Israel. These absurd demands further expose Obama’s very poor judgment vis-a-vis a regime that is actively aiding and abetting terrorists in Iraq who are killing US servicemen. Iran’s “preconditions” prove that negotiating with bad-faith actors who hate Americans and Jews would accomplish nothing other than handing their regime a PR coup. In recent months, Obama’s campaign has continually claimed that he didn’t actually make the promise that he did. The tape does not lie:


Barack Obama was rated the most liberal United States Senator in 2007 by the non-partisan National Journal — farther left than Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, and self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders. He rarely mentions this extreme voting record as he campaigns throughout the heartland, just as he refrains from telling middle America what he really thinks of those who live there. Obama waits until he’s in San Francisco to do that. At a chic fundraising dinner, Obama sniffed that average Americans get “bitter” and “cling” to their guns and religion—as if these were shameful crutches. He may look down his nose at you, but he still wants your vote:

Obama also expressed disapproval of Americans’ (apparently) selfish way of life, scolding his fellow citizens for doing awful things like driving SUVs, heating their homes to a comfortable temperature, and eating as much as they’d like. Note the return of John Kerry’s “global test” in his remarks. If this is how he lectures Americans while he’s still pandering for votes, one wonders how preachy a President Obama might get:


Millions of Americans oppose Senator Obama’s candidacy for many different reasons. For a small number of bigots, one of them is almost certainly race. That being said, Obama’s surrogates and media supporters have shown very little reluctance to ascribe racism to virtually anyone who supports another candidate. This is shameful. Worse still, Obama has personally played the race card several times, accusing Republicans in general, and the McCain campaign specifically, of whipping up race-based ugliness. When McCain’s objects, Obama has disingenuously denied he was referring to race in his initial comments. Really? On one occasion, Obama accused Republicans of trying to “scare” voters by mentioning that he “doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.” At another rally he made a similar claim, adding “…did we mention he’s black?” to his interpretation of the GOP’s supposed scare tactics. As someone who presents himself as a unifying figure, what does it say that he shamelessly injects racial politics into the campaign, casting aspersions on his opponents’ motives? Watch and listen for yourself:

With the exception of one time each by the Washington Post and ABC News (on their blogs), the media did nothing to expose this tactic by Obama and his campaign employed on these occasions:


After an embarrassing exchange on a talk show, the Obama campaign scrambled to arm its surrogates with talking points about Obama’s grand legislative record. What did they come up with? Two bills—and Obama talks about them endlessly. One deals with securing loose nuclear weapons and was so uncontroversial that it passed on a voice vote in the Senate. The other created a “google for government” system, allowing citizens to track government spending. Both were laudable efforts for a wet-behind-the-ears legislator, but Obama wants to be President. Beyond those two meager accomplishments, what has he done? It’s a question that has baffled official campaign surrogates and regular Americans alike:


All three of us have written many, many times on all of these issues. Taken individually, most of them would create doubt about the readiness and honesty of any political candidate. Put together as a narrative, we believe this paints the picture of a man who has few real credentials for the office he seeks beyond the Constitutional minimum, and a politician who has succeeded in obfuscating his hard-Left ideology.

Perhaps if Barack Obama had taken more time to build his resumé – especially with executive experience – he might have made a more compelling candidate, and might have demonstrated at least a little of the moderation he has claimed. Instead, Democrats want America to support at once the most radical and least qualified candidate for President in at least a century. They have tried to conceal this with the complicity of a pom-pom-waving national media that has shown much more interest in the political background of a plumber from Ohio than in a major-party candidate for President.

America deserves better than that. Voters deserve the truth from the press, not vague cheers of “hope” and “change” while willfully ignoring or air-brushing Obama’s record. We hope to set that record straight with our essay.

Update: We may add a couple more videos as the day goes along, so keep checking back. If you want to see more, please visit Mary Katharine Ham’s YouTube channel or the Weekly Standard.

Update II: Here’s one video we forgot in our comprehensive argument. Barack Obama offered his insights into his military policy in the middle of a war — cut everything that might make us secure:

He’ll cut missile defense, new weapons systems, and just about everything he can.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


Holy shiite, that was comprehensive. Now if only it would reach a larger audience.

Bishop on October 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM


El_Terrible on October 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM


LibertarianConservative on October 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM

St Barack Hussein

Keeping it real…

Hening on October 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM

As mathematicians like to say:


Religious_Zealot on October 21, 2008 at 12:56 PM

It will take me a while to digest all of this but what a post Ed! Fantastic!!

Maxx on October 21, 2008 at 12:56 PM

Please keep this at the top for the next couple of weeks!

RushBaby on October 21, 2008 at 12:57 PM

Can we get the Palin-Glenn Beck radio interview on here? It’s pretty awesome. She’s come a million miles since the Couric days.

lodge on October 21, 2008 at 12:58 PM

As the saying goes, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

If it looks good,
And it taste good,
And it feels good,
There has got to be something wrong some where,
So be careful.

Murphy9 on October 21, 2008 at 12:58 PM

How does this help Michelle’s children? The other Michelle, not the boss here.

Just A Grunt on October 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM


Ed, my hat is off to you, sir, and to Mr. Benson and Miss Ham.

One more reason why I love this site.

MadisonConservative on October 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

This is great,you went to a lot of hard work for this and I for 1 thank you.I’m forwarding this to everyone I know and think everyone here should do the same.

tee866 on October 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Buzz it up!

Spanglemaker on October 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Ed: Do you have a copy-paste version of this? With the YouTube codes and all. I’m sure other bloggers would like to create a post with this in it. It’d help spread the word.

amerpundit on October 21, 2008 at 12:59 PM

I think they covered everything, but of course, I didn’t read the entire thing. This was huge! I hope uninformed voters take the time to read it, and that it convinces them.

Jay on October 21, 2008 at 1:00 PM

Or, you know, they could just be sent here. My mind isn’t working today. Coffee maker broke.

amerpundit on October 21, 2008 at 1:00 PM


originalpechanga on October 21, 2008 at 1:00 PM

Loud and continuous applause for all your efforts!!

anniekc on October 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM

Brilliant – and I haven’t even finished yet O_O


Grue in the Attic on October 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM

I regret that I have but one Buzz Up to give to this post.

saint kansas on October 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM

Wow, indeed.

wise_man on October 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Outstanding! Keep it at the top for the next two weeks!

ObisSister on October 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Great read. Although videos are not working.

Kini on October 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM


aero on October 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM

INFO OVERLOAD, but in a Good Way!

Good Job Ed, Mary Kathrine and Guy!

upinak on October 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM

Big props, playas. Well done.

OT: The difference is clear at McCain and Obama campaign offices

No bias in this article, right? FYI…..check where it is published.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 21, 2008 at 1:07 PM

Has this been sent to all media outlets, including newspapers, TV stations, radio stations, and internet sites?

Not hat man will pick it up with zeal, but some will surely explore.

Oh, don’t forget the NObama Truth Squad…Keep them busy for a while.

Oxybeles on October 21, 2008 at 1:07 PM

Great read. Although videos are not working.
Kini on October 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM

I think it’s all the youtube video links that are making this page so difficult to load. If this happens to everybody, might substitute all the embedded youtube links with a photo and a link to the youtube page, to make this less bogged down.

wise_man on October 21, 2008 at 1:07 PM



Religious_Zealot on October 21, 2008 at 1:08 PM

I am with Ameri on this.

Ed, can the other bloggers add this WHOLE item to theirs?

upinak on October 21, 2008 at 1:08 PM

Wow! This is the best post ever. Going to have to put some time aside to digest this all. Great work!

carbon_footprint on October 21, 2008 at 1:08 PM

Please keep this particular post/thread available on the front page until Nov 5.

CC – BHO: “my Muslim faith”

CapedConservative on October 21, 2008 at 1:09 PM

Fantastic! Simply fantastic. Well done, all.

Weight of Glory on October 21, 2008 at 1:10 PM


mylegsareswollen on October 21, 2008 at 1:12 PM

In other words, Oblabbo’s someone who should never be elected as dog catcher, much less be this close to the office of POTUS.

AubieJon on October 21, 2008 at 1:12 PM

This is the best prepared, most comprehensive compilation of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I wish there was a way to get this story as is, to the uneducated masses that neither know nor care, for whom they vote. I plan to save this and use it in about one year, if Obummer gets in. Then I can show it to all the dopes that helped to wreck this country. Everyone knows the old adage about history repeating itself…. I can envision the return of the “brown-shirts” with their Obummer patches marching on the heartland to get rid of all those who cling to their guns and bibles.

HomeoftheBrave on October 21, 2008 at 1:13 PM

Thank you so much Ed for this. This about sums up bho, not a man I want for my President.

letget on October 21, 2008 at 1:13 PM

Well done.

marklmail on October 21, 2008 at 1:14 PM

Good summary. Too bad most American voters will never know most of these facts.

AZCoyote on October 21, 2008 at 1:14 PM

Extremely well done. Guy, MKH, Ed, you deserve a round of applause for this effort.

I do not intend to demean it when I say that it is a damn shame that it won’t be read by a wide audience. Such is the state of our media, as you so very well put it.

Red Cloud on October 21, 2008 at 1:14 PM

Copy Paste and Pass it along…………….

Seven Percent Solution on October 21, 2008 at 1:14 PM

This was excellent work by all involved. Kudos.

either orr on October 21, 2008 at 1:14 PM

Obama was still a part-time State Senator representing a liberal district in Chicago. Before that he was an attorney and, famously, a community organizer.

The part-time reference is good and should be repeated.

Slight, important correction.

he was an a civil rights attorney and, famously, a liberal agitator which he refers to as a community organizer.

I don’t think people know he is a civil rights lawyer.

Should add to race card section:

Obama pulls race card in a Presidential debate with previously debunked “kill him” smears. The Secret Service investigated both claims and they were proven false. The origin of the smears were none other than Olbermann hack, Dana Milbank, plus a “reporter” from Biden’s hometown newspaper.

faraway on October 21, 2008 at 1:14 PM

Great job organizing this, but you may want to reconcile the title of the article and this sentence:

“What follows is by no means comprehensive,…”

Just sayin’…


DJ Tablesauce on October 21, 2008 at 1:16 PM

Regarding the “tape does not lie” about meeting without preconditions… Simply go to Obama’s current website:

The third bullet point under “Iran” reads:

Dimplomacy: Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.

Maybe that’s not the webmaster Obama knew?

Abby Adams on October 21, 2008 at 1:16 PM

Outstanding. I do have a question, though — have you all given any thought to doing a similar piece making the affirmative case for McCain? The problem I’ve had in discussing this election is that the “McCain is negative” meme has really penetrated the consciousness of people. Never mind that Obama’s campaign has been nastier in large measure; perception is reality.

If you haven’t done this, are you aware of a similar pro-McCain compendium? That would help make the sale, doncha think?

Mr. D on October 21, 2008 at 1:17 PM

McCain has to also buy 1/2 hour of prime time and present a narrative such as the above including video of Obama’s statements outlining on how he is going to slash the military during the time of war.

Then conclude it with a positive view going forward despite our current financial times–akin to the challenges Reagan faced in 1980–and this election can still be won.

patrick neid on October 21, 2008 at 1:17 PM

This should be on McCain’s web page.

sammypants on October 21, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Can we get a comprehensive arguement for McCain?

Theworldisnotenough on October 21, 2008 at 1:18 PM

That’s gonna leave a mark…..Ouch!!

Barry goes down in flames.

omnipotent on October 21, 2008 at 1:18 PM

I’ve been saying for a while that history will look back at the 2004 election and deem John Kerry the worst major party presidential candidate of all time.

The only thing that now gives me pause is Obama.

While Obama is clearly the better ‘packaged’ candidate and smoother, more articulate candidate…

…there is really nothing else behind Obama other than a “shiny surface.”

Oh, and Marxism. Can’t forget about that.

Religious_Zealot on October 21, 2008 at 1:19 PM

Do we have any rich benefactors that could put this on Primetime…say every day the day after Obama’s great infomercial airs?? This is one time I wish I was independently wealthy :)

ConMom on October 21, 2008 at 1:21 PM

As predicted, Obama in his own words, PRICELESS.

patrick neid on October 21, 2008 at 1:21 PM

A good lawyer’s closing argument but I’m afraid it won’t have much of an impact. Perhaps you can convince the McCain campaign to pay for time on the Networks so you can get the message out. The internet always has been a place for political junkies and will forever remain so. The average voter gets his information from theMSM and that includes Fox for this purpose. Unless and until the alphabet networks run similar editorial stories then all this is vanity.

jerryofva on October 21, 2008 at 1:23 PM

The problem I’ve had in discussing this election is that the “McCain is negative” meme has really penetrated the consciousness of people.

The reason that it has penetrated is because in large measure it is true. I’ll not get in specifics and re-hash the obvious here because the thread is best served making the case against Obama but John McCain isn’t an easy sell, particularly with the GOP base. How do you convince mainstream voters to trust a man who to this day claims that it is racist to deny illegals free entry in the country with a no-questions-asked amnesty scheme?

highhopes on October 21, 2008 at 1:24 PM

If the prices quoted by Obama are correct, one million per 30 minutes, this is easily affordable. Something akin to this should be on all five majors at least twice. It can be done for less than 10 million.

patrick neid on October 21, 2008 at 1:24 PM

A really great piece, but not quite comprehensive. I saw no mention that Obama has recently announced that upon assuming office he will immediately have the EPA declare CO2 a “dangerous pollutant”. The potential havoc that Algore and his minions could reek on the world as a result of such a decision could have an impact that would dwarf the disaster of his other socialist plans.

djaces on October 21, 2008 at 1:25 PM

if Obama wins on November 4th—and serves one full term in the Oval Office—the Presidency of the United States would be the longest consecutively held full-time job he has ever held without seeking another.

What would happen to a job applicant with that kind of work history?

davidk on October 21, 2008 at 1:25 PM

Great list, but I wish Obama’s desire to disarm the public (and where that always leads) would get a little more play. Many of the ~80 million legitimate gun owners are more than a bit concerned. The Second Amendment protects the First from easy elimination.

– Bitter Clinger

P.S. In case you missed it in the headlines, check out Michael Medved’s slammin’ piece on the permanent damages even a one-term Obama Presidency would inflict.

eeyore on October 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

The radical associations issue needs a way to tie it all together.

I don’t think most people see these associations as a pattern.

Might lead in with:

Obama said in his book, Dreams of My father, “I chose my friends carefully… the more politically active black students, the Chicanos, the Marxist professors.”

Obama’s only known carefully chosen mentors are:
– Frank Davis (Communist Party Member)
– Rev Wright (God Damn America)
– Bill Ayers (should have bombed more)
– Tony Rezko (convicted of fraud,bribery and kickbacks)

faraway on October 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Bookmarked and forwarded!!

Cylor on October 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

What a well done article. Every American should read this before casting their votes. Of course most of the people voting for Barry probably read at a 3rd grade level so it’s a bit much to ask.

UnEasyRider on October 21, 2008 at 1:27 PM

highhopes on October 21, 2008 at 1:24 PM

Don’t you ever take a day off?

wise_man on October 21, 2008 at 1:27 PM


For the people that feel the way you mention, perhaps including yourself, there is Palin. Allowed four years as VP she will be very electable when the time comes.

patrick neid on October 21, 2008 at 1:28 PM

AWESOME — thank you.

I’m blasting this link all over creation.

D2Boston on October 21, 2008 at 1:29 PM

I find it really hard to take someone in their 20’s seriously as a “conservative”. To me, the most interesting and convincing conservatives are people who’ve lived through different swings of the political pendulum and can honestly weigh the pluses and minuses to arrive at an informed point of view. I’m just too tempted to say to a twenty-something conservative, “Hey kid, go out and raise some hell, explore the world and try your hand at something new for a couple of decades before wedding yourself to the idea that your purpose in life is to preserve someone else’s ideals. If down the line you decide that’s we’re you’re at, congratulations, but at least you were open to other possibilities.”.

sanguine4 on October 21, 2008 at 1:31 PM

I’m blasting this link all over creation.

D2Boston on October 21, 2008 at 1:29 PM

Seconded. Family, friends, church, online contacts. Soon as I get home.


Grue in the Attic on October 21, 2008 at 1:31 PM

sanguine4 on October 21, 2008 at 1:31 PM

I’m 23. My response to such a suggestion would be as follows: “I’m sorry sir/ma’am, but I was raised better than that. I know what’s right and wrong, and frankly sir/ma’am I’m not going to waste ‘a couple of decades’ on something I know to be wrong. I’ve seen enough of ‘other possibilities’ – it’s impossible to avoid them, especially for someone my age! – to know I want nothing to do with them.”


Grue in the Attic on October 21, 2008 at 1:33 PM

P.S. In case you missed it in the headlines, check out Michael Medved’s slammin’ piece on the permanent damages even a one-term Obama Presidency would inflict.

eeyore on October 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM

That was perhaps the best article posted in the last several weeks. It goes to the heart of the matter as regards the non stop arguing by all too many here on why they were going to stay home because McCain got the nomination. This article gives the blow by blow of how government expands never receding and what is in store based on Obama promises.

patrick neid on October 21, 2008 at 1:37 PM

BUZZ this one up folks.

AubieJon on October 21, 2008 at 1:38 PM

I find it really hard to take someone in their 20’s seriously as a “conservative”.
sanguine4 on October 21, 2008 at 1:31 PM

I applaud the fact that MKH and Mr. Benson are secure in their beliefs. I have never waivered in mine even in my 20’s. Sometimes raisin’ hell is totally against one’s character. Conservatism runs through the fabric of who I am and who I always will be, and I’m sure most conservatives are very secure in their ideals. The closest I’ve come to raisin’ hell is forcing myself to read and investigate the ideology (flawed) of liberals. Makes me feel *unclean*! :)

ConMom on October 21, 2008 at 1:39 PM

ConMom on October 21, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Hear-hear. :)


Grue in the Attic on October 21, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Obama is dangerously ill-suited by lack of skills, lack of judgement, and lack of integrity to the job of Commander-in-Chief.

drunyan8315 on October 21, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Email the link to this to everyone you know, especially if they live in a swing state. We need to get the buzz going before election day. Below is the tinyurl for your cutting and pasting pleasure.

Kafir on October 21, 2008 at 1:42 PM

For the people that feel the way you mention, perhaps including yourself, there is Palin. Allowed four years as VP she will be very electable when the time comes.

patrick neid on October 21, 2008 at 1:28 PM

I’ve already voted absentee for McCain and, yes, Palin is the one bright spot in an utterly dismal election year with two bad choices.

One caveat you need to remember is that GHWB going from VP to the top job was a rarity. Outside of unexpected resignation/death the VP has rarely stepped into the Presidency immediately after serving as VP.

highhopes on October 21, 2008 at 1:42 PM

Far better than what I can do. Thanks.

steveegg on October 21, 2008 at 1:44 PM

great work!

cryptojunkie on October 21, 2008 at 1:46 PM

Nice piece of work.

drjohn on October 21, 2008 at 1:46 PM

Outstanding! Keep it at the top for the next two weeks!

ObisSister on October 21, 2008 at 1:03 PM


macblanegirl on October 21, 2008 at 1:47 PM

I think one can smoke dope, do blow, do hookers, drink yourself blind, and still remain a conservative.

It’s more libertarian but who’s splitting ash trays?

mylegsareswollen on October 21, 2008 at 1:48 PM

Go to McCains site and make a few phone calls in your state for the campaign. I just did some here in NC. we have to help out and it costs nothing but a little bit of time.

Mommypundit on October 21, 2008 at 1:50 PM

Yes, please keep this at the top of the page through Election Day.

Ward Cleaver on October 21, 2008 at 1:51 PM

Nice work. I would add earmarks (including money for the institution that employs his wife), Fannie and Freddie contributions, his broken promise on public fincancing, illegal contributions from overseas and untraceable sources, ineffective and abandoned past efforts (see Altgelt Gardens, the gazebo), his designation as the Senate’s most liberal member (left Barbara Boxer and Ted Kennedy in the dust!), his history of voting “present”, his tendency to claim to always have been where he wants to be (see Israel, 2nd Amnendment), and his oozing sense of entitlement and messianism.

That would make the article longer, but it is not the fault of his opposition that there are so many, many reasons to mistrust Barack Obama. I hope after the election I will live in a country where it remains permissible to mistrust Barack Obama.

Baba Tutu on October 21, 2008 at 1:51 PM

The comprehensive argument against Barack Obama
. . .
What follows is by no means comprehensive,

Maybe it should be called “The semi-comprehensive argument against Barack Obama”

The Monster on October 21, 2008 at 1:53 PM

Excellent presentation of who we should not vote for and why not.

Now, it would be far more convincing if a similar effort was put forth for the long list of reasons we should ask our family and friends to vote for McCain.

It is far easier to convince family and friends when we come bearing positive points to ponder in addition to the negative.

heroyalwhyness on October 21, 2008 at 1:57 PM

Can’t wait to enjoy this when I have the time. Are there any clips of Hussein’s anti-white racist remarks from his Books on Tape readings? If not, it ain’t comprehensive.

Akzed on October 21, 2008 at 1:58 PM

I haven’t read it yet, but it looks impressive. I like the use of the medium by having video clips embedded with the text. I will read this when I have more time.

I will also likely send this link to other leftist friends. Not that it will convince the die-hards, but to at least illustrate that there is a complete, thought-out objection to The One’s policies and ideology. There are no racists here.

I second other suggestions to pin this to the top of the page.

Mallard T. Drake on October 21, 2008 at 1:58 PM