Obama's Charm: "It's All Gone"

[Christians4LessGvt]

It's All Gone

Abe Greenwald - 04.13.2008 - 6:59 PM

The radiant charm; the verbal agility; the promise of change; the post-racial unity; the deferential press; and most importantly, the vagueness of character and intent that sustained the whole facade. These were the hallmarks of Barack Obama's run for the Democratic nomination, and bit-by-bit, associate-by-associate, gaffe-by-gaffe, the junior senator from Illinois has given all of it back. The extraordinary bounty that had made his campaign a nearly unstoppable force of nature is gone.

With last Sunday's revelationthat he looks at smalltown America and finds armed, hate-filled, irredentist religious zealots the last piece of the Obama puzzle fell into place. He is not, it turns out, an agent of change; he is a walking checklist of modern liberal inanities. Big government: check. Crippling taxes: check. Arrogance: check. Identity divisiveness: check. Moral superiority: check. Softness on enemies: check. Shakiness on Israel: check. Questionable patriotism: check.

Half a year ago, the formula for a serious journalistic portrait of Barack Obama was as follows: one extra long cosmetic description, one detailed childhood recap, some praise for his efforts as a memoirist, and a closing discussion of a nation poised for change. No one knew enough about the man's politics to delve further. However, in the course of a few months he has created a resume of mistakes that's left the content of those early articles looking as relevant as the lines on a printer test. Today's Obama portrait is of a man embattled, a candidate whose repeatedly faulty judgment demands explanation.

Yet, the math is the math is the math, and as we know the superdelegates are his to lose. While they may now realize they've thrown in their lot with the dazzling candidate from a few months ago, turning their backs on the candidate who can't stop fumbling today could cause a scandal one perhaps even bigger than the scandals repeatedly served up by Hillary and Obama. However, it's a scandal the party leadership may decide to weather, because the man who has at last filled out the empty suit has turned out to be very very beatable.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/greenwald/3337

[BT]

The elitist meme is a straw man.

On the face of it, his comments though impolitic, ring true.

In times of trouble, we do cling to foundational beliefs and close ranks against others.

Humans are tribal after all.

[sirs]

I tend to agree with Bt.  I'm sure Obama is sincere in what he said....just that he didn't guage how PiC they were, thus his redirection on how he should have phrased them better. 

[Rich]

Ring true?

What you're seeing with Obama is what we see in here on a regular basis. The left throws out platitudes to the average man and woman while in private they despise them for their ignorance,  belief in God, and reliance on something other than government and the good graces of liberals for their daily bread. As I said, we see it here. The attacks on the south and it's citizens. The ridicule of religious believers. Obama has unwittingly given us a glimpse into what he really thinks about all those redneck racists out there who are stupid enough to vote for him.

A uniter doesn't throw his grandmother under the bus, nor does he look down his nose at the people he intends to unite.

[Christians4LessGvt]

all i know is i am sending money to:

http://hillaryclinton.com/hq/pennsylvania/?sc=

[Xavier_Onassis]

"Shakiness on Israel" Finally. Israel is a beggar nation that has caused us far more problems than any conceivable good it has done us.

Obama is right on the money about how out of work smalltown people cling to their fundie religions and guns as though they would bring salvation. I went to HS with such people, and my hometown is now a rather prosperous suburb and is not nearly so dead-end a place as some that are further away from a large city.

Perhaps he should not have said it. He did not say this for public consumption, after all. But it IS TRUE.

Neither guns not fundie Christianity will create jobs of prosperity in such places, and take up a lot of time that could be spent in more useful activities that might do so.

[Rich]

>>Obama is right on the money about how out of work smalltown people cling to their fundie religions and guns as though they would bring salvation. I went to HS with such people and my hometown is now a rather prosperous suburb and is not nearly so dead-end a place as some that are further away from a large city.<<

For some reason I'm guessing X wasn't president of his class.

But here's more proof of what I said earlier. It's typical of liberals to feel superior to others and look down their noses at people. X has written his bigotry down for the internet to see. I couldn't have written it better myself. It's the bigotry and hate that's at the heart of liberalism. Obama is no different than X in this regard.

[_JS]

all i know is i am sending money to:

http://hillaryclinton.com/hq/pennsylvania/?sc=

Careful CU4, sometimes you get exactly what you ask for - President John McCain...

[sirs]

I'm definately not thrilled with that prospect.  But given the egregiously worse alternatives, it's the best we can hope for at this juncture.

[_JS]

I'm definately not thrilled with that prospect.  But given the egregiously worse alternatives, it's the best we can hope for at this juncture.

Aren't you responsible for the actions of the person you elect into office?

[BT]

Aren't you responsible for the actions of the person you elect into office?

no

[Brassmask]

Why do you care?

What is McCain doing these days?  

[_JS]

Aren't you responsible for the actions of the person you elect into office?

no

So, in a democracy, you aren't responsible for making an informed decision? You could vote in a former Dixiecrat and then be astonished when he says something blatantly racist?

[Brassmask]

Obama is right.

[Rich]

If you voted for him because you knew he was a racist, then yes, you are responsible. If you voted for Bill Clinton you aren't responsible for his adultery. Unless of course you knew he was an adulterer before you voted for him.