Mon 30 Jun 2008
Obamanation - Dividing Our Country Under the Guise of Unity
Posted by Jack Gamble - Man Overboard under Babeled, Current Events, Politics
That’s right all you change mongers, unificators, and yes-we-canadians. Barack Obama will divide our country even further. He will do it right under your liberal noses.
How?
His campaign claims he will erase hatred and bigotry yet most of his supporters call John McCain “Politics as Usual” simply because he is a wealthy, elderly, white male. Well to me that sounds like racism, ageism, sexism, and class warefare all bundled up in one convenient package with big ears and a slick tounge.
His biggest proponents claim he will unify the country. I cannot imagine a more idiotic statement. Obama is the most Liberal candidate to win the Democratic nomination in my lifetime. How is a man who makes Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy look like conservatives supposed to unite the country? In fact, if you look closely at his policy, he is even further to the left than everyone’s favorite villain, Bush, is to the right. So how will this mend the tear between the parties? It will serve just the opposite effect of increasing the divide between left and right. If one candidate actually has a chance at unifying the country it is the extremely moderate McCain who is only a stone’s throw away from a Democrat in terms of policy and has been the single most outspoken critic of the Bush Administration on that side of the aisle since the 2000 primaries.
I’m sorry Obamacons, but your boy is only another Bush riding a Donkey instead of an Elephant and you can’t even see it coming - No you can’t.
~Man Overboard
Popularity: 16% [?]
July 1st, 2008 at 2:34 am
What I find funny is no one had a problem with Mr. Obama when he was behind Mrs. Clinton in the poles and it didn’t look like he could win. I’m sure there will be some who deny this or make other excuses but I can assure you I know what I heard.
The country is divided and you make a good point about Mr. McCaine being bi partisan. He has reached across the isle several times. However, I believe the The Obaama camp is claiming that his way is politics as usual has more to do with the fact that in 2000 he was a maverick and someone who we thought would finally speak truth to power. This didn’t work so he adjusted and is now playing the politics game this time around. To my knowledge Mr. Obama and his staff never said it is politics as usual because he is old and white.
I believe Barrack Obama to be an honest and thoughtful man who appears willing to listen. Could this all be empty promises? Maybe. Could he be sincere but not be able to get the legislation past that will put forth his plan of change and hope? It is a possibility.
Politics as much as we want to
make it about policies, stances what it comes down to is who you believe. If you aren’t so disgusted you don’t believe in anyone. I believe Barrack Obama will make a great president who do wonders in uniting the country.
July 1st, 2008 at 7:07 am
What do you say to people who maintain that the policy that McCain is starting to set into stone is a rehash of Bush?
July 1st, 2008 at 7:30 am
“yes-we-canadians” that is priceless.
July 1st, 2008 at 9:42 am
Top notch play on words.
July 1st, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Obamanation
Abomination
Urination
Procrastination
Who-dis-nation
Proclamation
I love it.
July 1st, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Here is what I see coming…
We will be dependant on oil for at least the next 10-15 years. Everyone is not going to drive hybrids and fuel cell cars at once. It will take this long for any kind of transition (nuclear power plants, windmills, solar, etc.) and countries like China and India will continue to increase the demand for oil.
I see Obama supporting the environmentalists and activists in the sense of no drilling, no new refineries, and no exploring.
I also see Obama taxing the oil companies. They will only pass along this tax to the price at the pump.
Then, I see interest rates rising which will continue to criple the housing market, increasing the amount of foreclosures and discouraging the buying of new homes.
Last but not least, I see Obama increasing taxes on not only the rich but also the middle class.
How the heck is all this going to be a good thing given the current state of the economy? No one has explained this to me yet.
July 1st, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Obama’s not actually going to raise the taxes on the middle class. If you make less than ~110,000 dollars, your taxes will be lower under Obama according to the Congressional Budget Office. If you make less than 250,000 dollars, you won’t have lower taxes than you do now.
Since ~90% of people make less than 100k a year, I would say that he is not raising taxes on the middle class. In fact, it looks to me like he’s lowering it.
If you still believe that he will, then I believe that John McCain is going to fly to Alpha Centauri on a tree he cut down himself and lead us to new lands.
July 1st, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Obama, nor McCain, will influence interest rates. The Fed Chairman cares not whether a liberal or a conservative is in office.
Besides, I have no sympathy for the borrowers of bad mortgages. Their greed clouded their judgment while making a very important decision.
July 1st, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Other than Keeks - whom by the way made an argument for politcal unity that holds less water than a cheese grater…ie “He seems like a nice guy on TV” - no one has made any attempt at refuting that Obama will further divide the nation.
Again, my point is he is so far to the extreme left to possibly unite anything that isn’t a purely liberal orgainzation. Ahem- politics as usual, anyone?
July 1st, 2008 at 8:06 pm
I won’t argue against something I agree with.
July 1st, 2008 at 8:14 pm
…but Rine and the Family Stone sure will!
July 1st, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Not taking the time to bother to refute your point does not imply you are right.
Nevertheless, let’s look at some numbers.
The majority of Americans (stupidly) don’t support free trade, and Obama has come out against it.
For other issues that matter to people, a majority of people think that we should pull out of Iraq soon, and Obama holds the lead on the economy for now.
For the full Obama-leaning rundown, check here.
Here you see McCain basically only winning in a military capacity.. EVERY OTHER ISSUE is getting the O-Bomb dropped all over it.
That, too, will change when Democrats keep rephrasing General Wesley Clarke’s comments on Presidential qualifications, as the essence of what he was saying was right on the money.
There’s a lot for the majority to like about Obama. It sure won’t be his fault when they only focus on the negatives.
July 1st, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Jake will be selling cool aid this Fourth of July weekend. Jake certainly did nothing to refute Jack’s argument. Jake cites poles with idea that we should believe that someone who follows them is a leader. Al contrario. Bubba Clinton was probably one of the poorest leaders ever to live in the White House, because he let the polls dictate his course of action. Ronald Reagan, probably the greatest leader to live in the White House in the twentieth century, stuck to his core beliefs no matter what the leftwing-media-controlled poles said. The result was the crumbling of the Berlin wall and the Iron Curtain.
So Jake, tell us how your hero is going to pay for his promises. Do you think that raising taxes on gasoline is going to lower feul prices? Is restricting trade going to lower prices? Is telling people how miserable they are an example of leadership? How in the hell is this guy giving anyone the incentive to get off their asses and work when he’s promising them everything for nothing. He’s not a leader or unfier. He’s the worse kind of politician.
July 1st, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Will Gundabar,
You introduced so many more ideas than I talked about that I have no choice but to respond to them line-item!
1) I did indeed find ideas that refuted Jack’s assertions.
2) Opinion polls are the best we have as far as seeing who is following whom. At the moment, the majority of Americans are ideologically aligned with Obama. If you want things a little more concrete, he is offering things such as extensions of Bush’s faith based initiatives, and has reached across the aisle on the (ill-advised) FISA bill. If you want a time he “went against the grain”, look no further than his Iraq vote (a vote that, according to a majority of Americans, he was right to cast).
3) Reagan was a strong foreign policy president in a time when America needed a strong foreign policy president. Mad props to him. Greatest of the 20th century? I think FDR has that one in the bag.
4) Bill Clinton bombed al Qaeda after everyone forgot about them after the first WTC attack, and started to deflate the size of the military from its inflated Cold War size, both of which were quite unpopular. He also got the economy roaring as well as balanced the budget (shutting down the government didn’t go over so well either), all the while ending with a 65% approval rating. I would go so far as to say that your assertion that Clinton was a poll-follower as wrong.
5) At the end of the day, Clinton and Reagan were both extremely successful presidents for their time.
6) Actually, as it stands, it’ll be easier for Barack to “pay” for his promises than McCain! According to the Tax Policy Center, McCain’s hit is 3.6 billion dollars and Obama’s is 2.7 billion dollars over 10 years.
These numbers are written on the assumption that the Bush tax cuts would have expired. When you assume they continue in a straight line, I saw in a paper the other day that Barack’s currently projected to have less of a deficit, but I can’t find my source right now, so don’t quote me on that.
7) I’d be interested in seeing a source that states that Obama would raise the gas tax. I’m calling BS.
9) Non sequitor! You have essentially stated that you do not agree with his positions, therefore he is neither a leader nor a unifier. Please see above.
July 1st, 2008 at 10:46 pm
So Jake - I take it your sources are not Fox News Opinion Dynamics - dig?
A poll much like a statistic will say what ever you want it to.
Case and point - 5 out of 7 bloggers feel Obama will divide rather than unite - per comments on this thread.
July 1st, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Jack’s post is correct. Res ipsa loquitur! We are already divided talking about this great uniter.
July 1st, 2008 at 11:13 pm
All the polls said Kerry was going to win in 2004. There are lies, statistics, and then polls.
July 1st, 2008 at 11:20 pm
I think you will always have some sort of division. You can never please all the people. As far as questioning statistics and poles you are correct. That hits on an earlier point made on this topic. It all depends on who you believe. Some people think President Bush has been arrogant and unwilling to listen to other viewpoints. While there are some who claim he is steadfast and principled.
July 2nd, 2008 at 12:46 am
As I will undoubtedly point out ad nauseum in months to come - Bush is not running.
The question stands, how is a liberal extremist going to unite the country?
July 2nd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
I almost pissed myself laughing while reading a Reagan bust-worshipper say that he was the greatest leader of the 20th century. See the Reaganomics post for the faults with that logic. His domestic decisions were not exactly the best things a president has ever done for the U.S. - in fact, he is the only president in history to concomitantly raise the income tax on the poor while decreasing it for the rich. Nice job.
The media is predominantly liberal-controlled but not entirely. Fox News is indeed a media outlet that most certainly does not lean to the left.
July 2nd, 2008 at 7:44 pm
I agree that polls mostly suck. However, I’m trying to base the discussion on more than conventional wisdom, hearsay, guesswork, and wishes. There are a few options:
1) We realize that there are no perfect metrics and try to use the imperfect ones we have.
2) We agree that all of the ideas on both sides are impossible to substantiate and we should all shake hands.
I personally think we can use nationwide polls to get an approximation of the consensus of the country. Is there a better factual way to base this argument?
Also, I doubt that Obama’s end-game goal is to have Ann Coulter shaking hands and hugging Jimmy Carter while laughing about the “good ol’ days.”
July 2nd, 2008 at 10:37 pm
I agree but . . .
July 3rd, 2008 at 2:18 am
Interesting article about who really controls the FED. I know this seems out of place but it was in response to comment #8.