The Candidates
Or, Worshiping in the Cult of O!bama…
Courtesy of the Wall Street Journal, who compiled these stories, we see a very disturbing trend emerging at Obama campaign rallies…
- Montecito, Calif., Sept. 8, 2007. “A woman standing in front of the stage appeared to faint as Obama spoke about Iraq,” the Associated Press reported. “The candidate paused and asked the crowd to make way for firefighters. One supporter shouted, ‘You’re a good man,’ leaving Obama momentarily at a loss for words. ‘Well, I’m not the only one stopping to help her,’ he said, sounding almost embarrassed.”
- Madison, Wis., Oct. 22, 2007. “This excitement mirrored the aura in the room that grew throughout his speech,” reported WISN-TV. “Before the senator arrived, students were tossing around an inflatable cow above the crowd. Three people fainted in the midst of all the enthusiasm.”
- Hanover, N.H., Jan. 8, 2008. “Barack Obama’s first and only rally on election day came to a sudden and lengthy stop when a young woman in the Dartmouth College gym fainted, and was eventually rolled off on a gurney by emergency medical technicians,” the Los Angeles Times reported. “At first Obama half-narrated the episode, saying soothing things like, ‘She’s OK,’ ‘She’s talking.’ But the longer she lay on the floor, the quieter Obama got, standing on the podium, arms folded, looking worried as the medical crew worked.” Minneapolis’s WCCO-TV has video showing Obama handing a bottle of water to the Dartmouth damsel in distress.
- Hartford, Conn., Feb. 4, 2008. “And when a woman appeared to faint in the standing-only VIP section in front of the podium, Obama paused his speech for over a minute as he directed the crowd to make way for an EMT team and tossed a bottle of water from the stage,” reported the Yale Daily News.
- Seattle, Feb. 8, 2008. “Climate change, the Iraq war and Obama tossing a bottle of water to a woman about to faint all received big cheers,” MSNBC.com reported. “As Obama told the crowd to part so that the woman in question could leave and called for help, a young girl in the crowd shouted out, ‘What a man!’ The audience roared with laughter (although the press that has seen this happen before rolled its eyes).”
Here we have five stories of the same thing happening: a woman (or women) fainting at an Obama campaign rally. We also have remarkably similar responses by Obama in each case, raising two distinct possibilities (and the debate is over which one would be more frightening if true):
In either case, people ought to be highly concerned about an Obama presidency. This is just to weird and creepy…
UPDATE: Courtesy of reader Linda comes these quotes from a Townhall article:
Which is why the Obama campaign has the feel of a religious revival with, as writer James Wolcott observed, a “salvational fervor” and “idealistic zeal divorced from any particular policy or cause and chariot-driven by pure euphoria.
…ABC’s Jake Tapper notes the “Helter-Skelter cultish qualities” of “Obama worshipers,” what Joel Stein of the Los Angeles Times calls “the Cult of Obama.” Obama’s Super Tuesday victory speech was a classic of the genre. Its effect was electric, eliciting a rhythmic fervor in the audience to such rhetorical nonsense as “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. (Cheers, applause.) We are the change that we seek.”
That was too much for Time’s Joe Klein. “There was something just a wee bit creepy about the mass messianism … ,” he wrote.
…
You might dismiss The New York Times’ Paul Krugman’s complaint that “the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality” as hyperbole. Until you hear Chris Matthews, who no longer has the excuse of youth, react to Obama’s Potomac primary victory speech with “My, I felt this thrill going up my leg.” When his MSNBC co-hosts tried to bail him out, he refused to recant. Not surprising for an acolyte who said that Obama “comes along, and he seems to have the answers. This is the New Testament.”
Scary stuff, folks.
February 15th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Wow…
Uh, yeah, I don’t know what to say.
February 15th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Huckabee is jealous
February 15th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
The power of the Presidency is difficult to constrain.
If we elect a charismatic leader with a Messiah complex we would have trouble limiting him.
My main fear with Obama is that he’d surprise everyone and be our “Hugo Chavez”.
February 15th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
I don’t get what people see in Obama, but the trend is very real. Liberals do tend to get stirred when he speaks, but I don’t really get it. If anyone does understand it, let me know.
February 15th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Clarence, I’m as clueless about Barack’s appeal as you.
I literally look at him and think “Jimmy Carter version 2.0″
February 15th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
“So this is how liberty dies… with thunderous applause.”
February 15th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Well, so far I’ve seen nothing in Obama’s character to lead me to believe he has a Messiah complex. Nor is he responsible for the (few) weirdoes that go to his speeches. I remember people having heart attacks at the “Last Temptation Of Christ” and it was just a movie with actors. Does that mean all Christians are over excited?
February 15th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Jonah Goldberg writes about this stuff in relation to Obama. The religious revival stuff is spot on. Barack Obama has become a secular messiah, something which is typified by his comments that we need to “create a heaven on earth”. He’s no joke and I’m having increasingly less sympathy for those who want to sit home to punish the GOP and John McCain. On literally dozens of levels, Barack Obama is a colossally horrifying figure. The country and the GOP will not survive an Obama presidency.
February 15th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Obama was raised by a muslim stepdad mostly overseas and is way to
charismatic and popular for his little experience. I sense something
sinister may be coming if he is elected POTUS.
February 15th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
But, anyway, this also just something that liberal women seem to do. Does no one remember all the swooning over Bubba?
February 15th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
That’s funny econ, we were saying in another comment section after a post that he wasn’t much like Jimmy Carter. We were saying he was more like George McGovern, Mike Dukakis, Walter Mondale, and John Kerry than he is like Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton. If he is like Jimmy Carter, that is scary because Carter could win. We also have conservatives unhappy with McCain just as conservatives were unhappy with Ford (even though McCain is much more conservative than Ford). I guess you would have to be liberal to understand his appeal. The people I know who support him give very vague reasons. I had one cousin of mine in his early 20s explain that he was favoring Barack Obama over John McCain because “he doesn’t want some old 71 year old dude telling him what to do. He wants change.” Kind of scary.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
I repeat myself, as I will over and over again:
Be afraid…be very VERY afraid.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
I find it moronic to compare Obama to Chavez or Carter, but this seems to be the latest GOP talking point. On CNBC some nut said he was Stalin. Those comments actually hurt rational discussion because, as I do, people dismiss them as drivel.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Mike #9 …precisely the point I made the other day. Since both of his parents are dead, they cannot run off their mouths about the truth, or even make “slips of the tongue”. Obama is indeed a mystery.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Joe M
What is the real plan Obama has for the U.S. do you think?
February 15th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Josiah,
Your quote was right on. And one good quote deserves another. Why is Obama a leftist phenominon?
G.K. Chesterton has the answer:
“When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing — they believe in anything.”
February 15th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Matthew #8,
Those who vote McCain in November will be just as guilty for running this Republic into the ground as those who vote Obama. I’m one of those Republicans who will not be voting for our nominee this November, but not because I want to “punish” the GOP or because I’m mad and want to sit this one out. I NEVER sit out elections. I’ll probably just be voting Constitution Party this go-around.
However, voting between Obama and McCain is like voting whether you want to hit a brick wall while driving 80 mph or 160 mph. Sure, there may be a sizeable difference in the severity of the crashes, but there’s no way you’re going to survive either crash, and there’s no way I’m going to vote for either.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
MWS #16,
I like a lot of G.K. Chesterton’s quotes, but I have to disagree with him on that one. I’m pretty much an atheist (Deist if you want to get picky). I think people are believing in anything these days because of intellectual sloth.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Axel,
You’d be surprised about the country’s reaction to “drivel”. The public is lapping up a guy who says things like “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change we seek”. Goodness me, I think I just swallowed the spoon.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Clarence,
“I had one cousin of mine in his early 20s explain that he was favoring Barack Obama over John McCain because “he doesn’t want some old 71 year old dude telling him what to do. He wants change.†”
How ironic. He must be okay with Obama telling him what to do? Afterall, he is the most most liberal in the Senate.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
I think Conservatives must support McCain as Obama may be up to
no good. Something just doesnt feel right how he has risen like
this with his background.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
That’s how uninformed most voters are. I’m sure Obama would be much more inclined to support restrictions on freedom in just about every area other than abortion. Obama would be a lot more inclined to support things like smoking bans, seat belt laws, speed limits than someone like McCain would. Plus Obama would tax people a lot more than McCain would if he had his way.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
If these are staged, they may be stopping soon. It seems that with suspicians raised, the Obama camp may have gotten all the mileage they can get out of it.
But if it IS staged, what exactly is the aim?
February 15th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
I highly doubt it’s staged. Liberals are just like this sometimes.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
MWS #23/Clarence #24,
What are you talking about? Nothing’s staged in politics. All of Rudy’s phone calls were impromptu, and none of Hillary’s questioners were plants.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Some things might be staged. I don’t think this is though. I don’t believe he gains anything from it.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
MWS,
To spread the feevah. To create a movement out of nothing. Good propagandists can do wonders in the modern age. They take an empty vessel, who happens to be young, black, and radically liberal, with powerful oratorical skills, and they thrust him on a population full of yuppie, secular, multi-culturalists who haven’t had anything to rave about since BOBBY and the Beatles, and who are pretty peeved because drugs haven’t been the same since the 60’s. The script practically writes itself, but throw in a dash of fainting, and a hint of messianic overtones and you’re cooking with Crisco.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Matthew E. Miller is onto something.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
#22 The problem with your analysis is that Obama has been getting beat up by liberals for opposing “mandated” healthcare. I think its also worth noting that he taught constitutional law at Chicago, the most conservative top 5 law school. A man who wants to control everyone would probably vote for more government surveillance not less.
As far as his slogans, I think he is right. Americans are the change we seek - this is a republic and we get to vote for what we want. Has the GOP been so beat up that it has forgotten what democracy means?
February 15th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
No, Matthew E. Miller is “on” something.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
I happen to agree with you on the surveillance thing, but the idea that Obama is anything but a liberal is laughable. His liberalism is so deeply ingrained that he probably doesn’t even realize he’s liberal. He takes the politically correct position on everything.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/
February 15th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Well, I don’t know what Matthew Miller thinks. I don’t think this is a planned strategy on the part of the Obama campaign, but I do think people with no religion need something to fill that void. Obama does relate extremely well to secular yuppies.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
I have to concur that I don’t really understand Obamamania, I went to an Obama rally in Omaha Nebraska and he seemed like a very good speaker, but not the greatest orator to ever walk the planet like he seems that he gets framed as.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Axel,
Americans are the change we seek? I’ve spent an awful lot of time reading in my life; I’ve probably averaged 3 books a week for 15 years. I’m reasonably familiar with the English language. But, I can’t even begin to comprehend what that is intended to mean. This bit is even worse; “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” More then vaguely messianic, but somehow still devoid of meaning. He manages to combine inanity, a cult-like aura, and truly ghastly writing in the span of 8-12 seconds.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I know this is a conservative blog, but let me take a crack at trying to explain what people see in obama.
There are many of us who are struggling when we shouldn’t be. we’re working hard, one or two jobs, but somehow, we barely make ends meet.
The war has weighed heavily on myself and many of the people I know. It’s sad that we still live in a society where war is anything but a last resort.
The Bush administration has been oppressive to those of us in the real world, and politics has always seemed like a stodgy, rich white guy’s game. Until now.
So, a message of hope from someone who gets it, someone who is more diverse, both in color and world experience, clicks with people. When Obama speaks, it’s with sincerity. He understands. There’s no debating that.
He’s also asking people to participate and that strikes a chord with people. For example, volunteering for college tuition credits.
He’s suggesting our society should operate more from the viewpoint of: doing what’s good for the whole. Society works better when you lift people from the bottom because the people on the top tend to hang on to what they have as opposed to give downward.
Obama also leads by example. His wife Michelle is brilliant and genuine. He appears to have been a good father. His family is intact. He’s also religious without being overbearing(read either of his 2 books).
We need a leader, a visionary, and having one that speaks the English language well is a bonus.
I hope that helps.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
“I repeat myself, as I will over and over again:
Be afraid…be very VERY afraid.”
What a perfect encapsulation of what the GOP campaign is / will be all about.
Ol’ Ronnie must be spinning in his grave.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Clarence Claus,
I’m not actually suggesting that it’s all staged. I agree with your number 24; this is just the way of the liberal in some respects. But, it’s hard to see what they’d gain from staging it (which is the question I was responding to). When you’re creating a cult of personality around a candidate perfectly tailored to a certain audience, fainting just adds to the aura.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Has anyone taken the time to consider that Obama’s rallies are packed to the ceiling with thousands of people in hot gymnasiums, and everybody has been standing around for hours (especially the ones next to the stage), under the hot lights, unable to move or get fresh air? It’s expected that under those conditions (and those stage lights make it *really* hot) that some people, especially women, are going to get dizzy or feel faint. He responds the same way because there’s no real other way to respond. He can’t exactly keep on talking and just ignore the poor woman.
I hoped that once Ron Paul was finished all the tin foil hats would go back in the closet, but apparently I was wrong
February 15th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
ocinrime,
I have no doubt your #37 was perfectly sincere; that’s what worries me. But, thanks for your input.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
But it’s NOT hard to see*
February 15th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
What I see going on here is the attempt to build a narrative. Not knowing how to deal with an opponent whoi is actually inspiring to Americans, who actually brings out enthusiastic supporters, the GOP will try to paint this messianic cult narrative.
The problem, of course, is that to the extent the average American looks at Obama and starts to like him, they will then be faced with this narrative. Will it scare them off - as is hoped? Or will it cause them to view the GOp as trying to insult them, and having nothing substantive to offer as an alternative?
I get the sense that the GOP is in the weaker position this year, as a baseline from which the campaign will be run. The upshot of that is that the party would need to work extra hard to be convincing - just playing to a draw in the campaign, or with any particular argument, leaves the baseline as determinative, the GOP loses. So it may well be with this narrative. I suspect the average person is more likely to feel insulted by the insinuation that anyone who likes Obama is a cultist, and that may well drive them to turn their liking of him into support.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
39, That is a good point, and it did enter my mind.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
37
Things are not right here and Obama must be stopped or I think the U.S.
is in big trouble and may be used to do bad things.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Mike,
Don’t stop taking your medication and please don’t buy any guns.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Funny Axel G.
but Obama’s background and upbringing should be cause for concern.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Mike #44,
The U.S. is in trouble whether it’s Obama or McCain. Our economic system is unsustainable. At historical rates of spending, by 2040 we will have only enough money to pay for Social Security and Medicare and that’s it. Nothing else. Unless we make Ron Paul-sized cuts in spending (which no other candidate, Democrat or Republican, has even come close to proposing) this country as we know it is coming to an end.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Josiah
I am no McCain fan but Obama shouldnt be allowed that power with his background and
upbringing.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Tano #42: “the GOP will try to paint this messianic cult narrative”
Unless it’s an elaborate hoax, that “Is Barack Obama the Messiah?” blog I linked to does not appear to be done by Republicans. The folks there appear (alas) to be totally sincere.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
What is of concern?
Being of a mixed marriage you mean?
Or is it being born in Hawaii?
Living as a child in Indonesia?
Being raised by his white grandparents - his grandfather fought in WWII - in Kansas?
Going to two ivy league schools and being president of the most prestigious legal journal in the country?
His background and upbringing, aside from his parents divorce, is to be admired.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Axel G
Being raised by a muslim step dad mostly overseas and rising to power
like this so quickly. It doesnt add up.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
The Muslim step-dad thing means nothing. He was overseas for all of two years. He’s risen so quickly because he’s been given a big boost not from Islamic radicals, but from American Democratic politicians who see him as a great electoral advantage. It adds up fine if you aren’t crazy.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Josiah,
Yes, but who is better off? I used to be awfully worried about just those sort of things until I realized that the US has, a percentage it’s GDP, a relatively small debt and relatively limited non-military spending. And we actually have population growth that provides enough workers for future generations. Europe will go to hell in a handbasket quicker then we will, with their death-spiral population growth, staggering entitlements, and increasing tensions between and non-Muslim populations. Japan is far too old to much of a threat economically. China cut off it’s growth too quickly. I mean, if every place collapses, and we collapse less, then we’ll still be in fairly good shape.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Matthew,
relatively we’ll always be okay, but that doesn’t mean that standards of living will fall and we won’t be as well off. Sorry for the the phrasing here…but just because life will suck worse for everybody else doesn’t mean that it won’t still suck for us.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
*standards of living WON’T fall…
February 15th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Mike i dont know what Obama’s real plans are. All I know is that he does not even have the nomination yet, and he is already spouting SOCIALISTIC ideas, which are getting him EVERYWHERE. If he becomes president, and he really is the sinister person that I fear, who knows what he would do or how he could harm the US of A… maybe he will start by diminishing our military, and set up policies to tear down our free market system..who knows.
Be afraid folks, be very VERY afraid.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
I’m not going to wade in on the “Obama is a secret Muslim radical” claptrap. It’s bad enough that he’s an open American radical.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
My point about him teaching at U of Chicago is not that it makes him conservative, but that pretty smart conservatives worked with him everyday. They would let us know if anything were amiss. I think its as simple as he says something people want to hear. If his message were crap his crowds would be a lot smaller.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Axel,
Nonsense. You might fairly say that some combination of his message, delivery, and personality is compelling to a fair portion of Americans, but that says precious little about the content of that message. People can be epically gullible and myopic.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
More than anything, modern-day Liberals want to believe. Don’t think about the consequences of your actions. Only be assured that your motives are pure. Then everything is alright.
Now, given the choice between believing in a fresh-faced, charismatic newcomer, and a well-known long-time shady operator who can’t raise her voice without sounding shrill, whom would you choose to “swoon” over?
So we have to figure out how to combat that. We can either out-charisma him, or out-smart him. Which is John McCain best at?
February 15th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
He’s likely just a regular American liberal, and like any liberal democrat he will end the progress we’ve had in moving the court to a more originalist stance, and I think its likely we will see judges who will try to find a right to gay marriage in the constitution and many social issues will be decided by the court rather than the people. He will also raise taxes and increase domestic spending, and he will pursue a retreat at all cost policy in Iraq. So basically we will see bigger government, our democracy will be further taken over by a liberal academic elite, and Iraq is likely to be taken over by islamic radicals. This is all the results of getting pretty much any liberal, these are all real results that we should outline, no need to go overboard and make him out to be Hugo Chavez.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
John Mark please don’t put words in my mouth - - I am not making Obama out to be Hugo Chavez. I am making him out to be Ayatollah Komenie……
February 15th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
marK,
Fortunately, there are different sorts of charisma, and I happen to think Obama has the least valuable kind (the charisma of a scripted tent-revival preacher). Unfortunately, John McCain doesn’t have any of the other kinds of charisma. That’s part of the reason that, though I despise him, the Huckster might make a decent number two. He too sounds alot like a tent-revival guy most of the time, but he’s considerably more extemporaneous and personable. I also like Pawlenty for this purpose, since I think he has a wonderful down-to-earth, wholesome type of charisma (which is more effective ultimately then the charisma of the tent revival preachers). But, whatever we do, we need to find a number 2 that’s capable of exciting and inspiring someone.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
62, Well someone was comparing him to Hugo Chavez.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
63 - - rice or steele…….we should try to appeal to the blacks if Obama is the nominee (or even if he isnt)
February 15th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
McCain should pick a reasonably charismatic VP, but we’re not going to win in a charisma contest against Obama.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Joe M,
Rice would be a reasonable choice, but Steele’s awful. Regardless we shouldn’t “try to appeal to blacks” beyond pushing those conservative policies we believe will benefit blacks. In an ordinary election, the Democratic party gets 90% of the black vote. Blacks make up about 6-8% of the voting electorate nationwide. With Obama at the top of the Democratic ticket, the first number goes up to 95% and second goes from 9-14%. Nothing we do at the bottom of the ticket is going to change that. Honest. We could resurrect Martin Luther King, and Barack would be pushing 95% and steady. I’m continually surprised that these sorts of suggestions routinely come up. We’d be better off appealing to Latinos, a group that actually is less likely to vote Democratic if Barack is the nominee.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
63, No to Rice, we definitely don’t want to make this election on a referendum on Bush’s foreign policy ( and will be in a sense anyway, but Rice would make it alot more so) or on anything Bush. Steele I think is a bit of New England Republican, pro-choice, moderate… Plus I don’t think he really has any experience. JC Watts might be a good pick except for his lack of executive experience.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
John Mark,
Steele is pro-life and not all that moderate (pretty conservative actually). But, he’s grossly unqualified.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Well I guess maybe I was wrong on that, I thought I remembered his website during the election sounded pro-choice, maybe I got him mixed up with another 2006 candidate.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
I told y’all so.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
I have to admit that I almost fainted at an Obama event last summer. It wasn’t because I thought he was the second coming, it was because I was standing in a crowd, in the hot sun for over an hour waiting for him to show up. That and I hadn’t eaten lunch yet. He is an excellent speaker, but at some point I have wonder if people are going to start noticing that there’s a lack of content to his speeches. I think he could have some difficulty if people start asking him ‘How?’.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
I’m very worried about Obama and his religious and political leanings.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
73, Personally I think we should focus on the political leanings part.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
John Mark,
He’s pro-life, but during a Meet the Press debate with Cardin, he was asked about Roe v. Wade and he said something like “well, I think the supreme court is going to decide that and i’m going to let them decide that, but generally, you know, they follow stare decisis and well, maybe they should kinda, probably, sorta, follow that, I guess”. It was the most awkward thing ever and you could tell it absolutely killed him to say it. So I’d say he’s extremely pro-life.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Well, maybe that makes someone Pro-Life in a blue state. I don’t think it would fly here in Nebraska.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
John Mark,
Oh, yeah, I know. But, I think calling yourself pro-life, but hedging on Roe, is pretty conservative for a blue state. Remember Bush has never called for Roe to overturned. He specifically said it should be upheld. Steele essentially took the Bush, Dole, Bush position on abortion. John McCain will be our most pro-life nominee since Reagan, at least rhetorically.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Well, if we can’t out-charisma him, can we out-smart him? What will happen when Obama and McCain go head-to-head in a series of debates?
February 15th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Ocinrime
#36
So basically it boils down to redistribution of wealth, and that somehow, because Obama is not an old white, the whole tenor, tone, and culture of government will change?
February 15th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Ocinrime
#36
So basically it boils down to redistribution of wealth, and that somehow, because Obama is not an old white guy, the whole tenor, tone, and culture of government will change?
February 15th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
You can be pro-life AND pro-choice. They are not mutually exclusive. I believe Rudy Giuliani falls into that category.
You can also be pro-abortion AND anti-choice. That would be the Chinese Government’s approach to children beyond the first born.
February 15th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
marK,
We can’t outsmart him with McCain. Obama’s not a great debater and he’s light on substance, but he’s plenty smart. You don’t graduate summa cum laude from places like U Chicago and Harvard Law without being smart. The McCain of 8 years ago MIGHT have been able to beat Obama in a debate. The 71 year old McCain, who looks every second of that 71 years, will have real trouble.
February 15th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
“Well, if we can’t out-charisma him, can we out-smart him?” I hope so, I think McCain there’s a possibility that McCain can show Obama to be the rooky he is in Foreign afairs. McCain’s has a shot at painting Obama to be just a smoth talking rookie senator who would be way over his head when it comes to foreign policy issues.
February 15th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
of those 71 years*
February 15th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
marK,
“You can be pro-life AND pro-choice.”
Right. It goes like this:
“Personally, I’m against murder and rape. But hey, if someone else wants to murder and rape, who am I to say they can’t? It’s a difficult decision, and it’s their bodies, so I can’t impose my morality on them. Thus, I am personally opposed to murder and rape, but support the right of others’ to CHOOSE.”
Is that kinda’ what you meant by “pro-life AND pro-choice?”
February 15th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Being “pro-life and pro-choice” is the most reprehensible position of all, because basically you are saying that you it is murder but will still support the “right” of the murderer to kill. Better to just be one of the kooks who can’t imagine there could be a living human growing inside a human.
February 15th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
MWS,
I agree. My mom holds this position, despite being a born again Christian, and I find it perfectly incoherent. As does my father and his wife. We once had a discussion where they readily agreed that abortion was worse then slavery, but that we still had no right to restrict access to it. I was at an utter loss. We tend not to discuss politics anymore.
February 15th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
MWS,
I can relate to it. I am personally pro-life (i.e. if I accidentally knocked up my fiancee, we would certainly have the child), against Roe v. Wade (from a Federalist point of view) but am not sure where I fall on the ban of abortion debate. This is mainly because conception to me is just a bunch of cells but after the first trimester, it looks like a human. I would put the cutoff somewhere in between. Regardless, since I don’t have a clear cut stance, I would not be against a full ban of abortion if it were put to a referendum
February 15th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Yeah, I and another pro-life student were having an arguement with three young women who apparently took the Kerry ” Abortion is wrong, but its the woman’s right to choose”, as a parting shot they defended themselves saying that they weren’t for abortion, I have thought I would have more respect for them if they were for abortion.
February 15th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Many of us find it equally ludicrous anti-abortionists call it “murder” yet almost universally feel the woman shouldn’t be punished. Folks, it is PREMEDITATED. If you think it’s murder, then you should be for the death penalty (or life in prison, at a minimum) for the mother.
Shows you aren’t serious with your words, words which keep you from progressing your agenda. Extremely stupid.
February 15th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
90 is spot-on.
February 15th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
90, There’s different levels of murder obviously, and there are mitigating circumstances. I would say a pretty big mitigating circumstance is that many woman don’t realize that they are taking life. We have different degreese of homicide, abortion should be a lower degree, not because its not a very valuable human life, but becasue not everyone realizes the value of the life as much, therefore, they are not as aware of their misdeed. We let people have less of a penality when they don’t intend to the great wrong, we should do the same for abortion. That said I don’t think woman should be totally off the hook. Especially not for late term abortion.
February 15th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Metro,
Well, I’m not someone that calls it murder since, one murder is a legal term, and it’s clearly legal, and two murder has a specific definition which requires “malice aforethought”. There’s rarely any malice involved in abortion, though certainly there’s forefront. I think the guilty party’s bear less responsibility for the act, though it’s every bit as tragic as murder. Regardless, I’m perfectly fine with “punishing the woman”, to the extent that the level of the crime requires (I think it’s probably something just above involuntary manslaughter). I’m just not convinced it’s necessary or likely to be terribly effective at reducing abortions.
February 15th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
On #92. the problem with the “different levels” argument is one of the main anti-aboriton arguments is that life begins at conception and that’s black and white. it’s either a life or it’s not, etc. etc. once you start talking about “different levels” then you give some credence to the pro-choice argument that there are “different levels” of viability and that conception does not equal life.
That’s why I agree with #88. It’s hard for me to see why a few cells deserves protection as life.
February 15th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
forethought*
February 15th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
#16 MWS - That G.K. Chesterton quote gave voice to all that I feel about the generation I’m in. It’s terrifying.
February 15th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
I want to clarify that I I don’t think Obama has shown himself to be a Hugo Chavez.
The point is that his popularity is built on his personality and not on substance.
That he can inspire such strong emotional feelings running on Jimmy Carter’s message in 1976 is scary.
Obama _could_ be a Hugo Chavez who’s popularly elected and then goes about legally taking apart our democracy.
I believe the McCain campaign needs to figure out how to destroy this Messiah’s illusion.
McCain needs to boldly point at him during a debate and ask why he voted to betray our soldiers in Iraq?
McCain needs to do this without the fake smile and without anger but in an attitude of disgust at a foolish charlatan who dares to run for the Presidency.
We need to unmask the angry arrogant Obama that is hiding below his controlled exterior.
February 15th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Ajay,
That’s a strawman. You’re referring to totally different types of “levels”. One refers to the degree of responsibility society ought to have to protect a morally worthwhile life, something which can’t plausibly involve any sorts of levels, while the other refers to the degree of responsibility one person should have if they commit a specific crime. There clearly are “levels” of punishment for different crimes. Shoplifting is not grand larsony. Grand larsony is not a triple homicide. This stuff goes back to Hammarabi; it has a long lineage. There’s no such lineage for varying levels of moral worth for different human beings. Anyway, we’re talking about those who say “yes, this is a morally reprehensible act, it’s as bad as murder, but I have no right to interfere with those who want to have an abortion”. That’s quite different from saying “I don’t know if this is morally reprehensible, therefore I won’t support banning it”.
February 15th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
We can’t outsmart him with McCain. Obama’s not a great debater and he’s light on substance, but he’s plenty smart. You don’t graduate summa cum laude from places like U Chicago and Harvard Law without being smart.
Obama never went to UChicago, although he lectured in its law school after Harvard. He did, however, go to Columbia University, where very nearly everyone graduates with honors, and then to Harvard, where he may have been good academically but produced very little actual scholarly work. I’ve seen both sides, and I’d put any graduate of a service academy (especially one trained to fly fighter/bomber aircraft) on equal intellectual footing with Ivy league grads. McCain’s no dummy, and Obama’s not as smart as he thinks he is.
February 15th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Obama was the editor of the Harvard Law Review, okay? That takes a lot of intellectual prowess. We cannot afford to underestimate him.
February 15th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
I’m voting for McCain now, but being 894th out of 899 class isn’t saying much, even at a naval academy, especially when your dad is an Admiral to help get you in there to begin with. Obama stays short on substance on purpose cause he is so socialistic.
February 16th, 2008 at 10:56 am
“I’d put any graduate of a service academy (especially one trained to fly fighter/bomber aircraft) on equal intellectual footing with Ivy league grads. McCain’s no dummy, and Obama’s not as smart as he thinks he is.”
I got news for you - students grade onto law review, so we are not talking about someone just in the top 5% of Harvard Law School. I don’t know his precise rank although I have heard he was actually #1, he would have to be somewhere between #1 and #5. You pretty much have to be mensa smart to graduate that high.
February 17th, 2008 at 3:48 am
This is the song that Obama reminds me of.
http://www.hamienet.com/midi7595_Superstar.html
Barack Obama, Superstar.
Who are you, what kind of change are you are talking about?
Barack Obama, Superstar,
Who are you, what kind of change are you are talking about?
Barack Obama, Superstar
Who are you, what kind of change are you talking about?
Adoph Hitler could really rally those masses, and Olde Joe Stalin could make them walk barefoot through broken glasses, And Ho Chin Minn, he could bring the crowd in, and that Po Pot he know how his words could make them hot…
Now do you believe?
Now Marshall Applewhite made them think that they were going to go to Heaven on a comet, and David Koresh he sent his faithful on a path to Armageddon. And of course we all know about olde Jim Jones. His people did what he told em and that Kool-aid got overflowin…
Now do you believe? (the mesmerized crowd shouts back Yes we Believe) Now do you believe?(louder) Yes, we believe! Hallelujah now get that sister some water (the front row of women then faints).
Barack Obama, Superstar,
Who are you, what kind of change are you are talking about?
Barack Obama, Superstar
Who are you, what kind of change are you talking about?
Now do you see yourself as as Che’s Second comin… Or maybe you set yourself up on a path even higher. Perhaps you do see yourself as the new Messiah, start a new religion with you as its idol.
Do you believe?
Cults of personalities well they very rarely end well and with yours it could set the earth a trembling… For when you come unglued as all cult leaders in the end do, you could push that nuclear button and set the earth afire..
Barack Obama, Superstar,
Who are you, what kind of change are you are talking about?
Barack Obama, Superstar!
Who are you, what kind of change are you talking about?
Barack Obama, Superstar!
Turing America into one big Manson Family
Barack Obama, Superstar!
Turning America into one big Manson Family