Here’s another reason why I support Barrack Obama for President of the United States of America.
Hamas Endorses Obama
On Sunday, Aaron Klein and John Batchelor interviewed Ahmed Yousef, chief political adviser to the Prime Minister of Hamas, on WABC radio. The interview produced a scoop which, for some reason, has not been widely publicized: Hamas has endorsed Barack Obama for President. Yousef said, “We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election.” Why? “He has a vision to change America.” Maybe Yousef has some insight into what Obama means by all these vague references to “change.”
Of course, Hamas’s taste in American presidents is suspect. Yousef also described Jimmy Carter, who was about to pay a call on Hamas when the interview was taped, as “this noble man” who “did an excellent job as President.”
Yousef was asked about Obama’s condemnation of Carter’s visit with Hamas, but didn’t seem troubled by it. Hamas, he says, understands American politics; this is the election season, and everyone wants to sound like a friend of Israel. Nevertheless, he hopes that the Democrats will change American policies when they take office.
Suprisingly, I have yet to see this reported on a single MSM source. It’s like they (Democrats) might not be proud of it or something. I can’t imagine why.
Maybe they realise it’s embarrassingly weak.
I’m willing to bet that Osama has been a Dubbya fan for a long time now. Woopdedoo.
bartink
You guys get apoplectic calling him a racist and unpatriotic former marine (just kidding you left that part out). And to act outraged that a black politician goes to a black church that says things that many blacks think is living in a world with blinders on.
The patriotism espoused that doesn’t allow one to criticize their country is infantile. Its the reaction small children have when someone insults their daddy. I personally think that most people are smarter than that. And if the polling is any indication, I might just be right.
How do you throw in patriotism and racism? You’re just going from one talking point to another these days. In the meantime, the idiot Obama keeps stepping in it:
You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.
And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
So, at an Obama fundraiser set up for San Francisco millionaires and billionaires, Obama calls Pennsylvanians (the ones he wants to vote for him shortly), gun nuts, religious wackos and xenophobic racists in a span of 10 seconds or so. I have to admit that that is a political strategy that I never saw coming. Can you imagine this guy on the international front? And even more funny was hearing the erudite, articulate speaker, the only candidate who can bring blacks, browns, whites, reds and yellows together; explain his gaff by saying “I, I, I, I cccould have said it better...” No Chance, you could have said “I could have said it better” better, but you made it perfectly clear how you feel about middle America whitey. And we’re still expected to believe that twenty years in Chance’s church had no effect on his view of whitey. Go ahead bart and CM, spin away.
And funnier still was Billary’s beer swilling, shot guzzling pandering to middle America whitey explaining why, after 35 years of living off the taxpayer dole, she’s not an elitist like Chance. And I didn’t mention her husband Billary coming up with four, count ‘em, four lies in his explanation of the Bosnian sniper fire that Billary the candidate survived. Well, I guess I did mention it. Anyway, you’ve got a couple of candidates to proud of, bart. Yes, indeed…
There, it’s reposted. All you need to read to form an opinion.
Bart???
In my experience half-empty towns ravaged by deindustrialisation do tend to harbour bitterness. And that bitterness can run deep. Many residents haven’t seen any hope from any elected official for as long as they can remember, so can tend to vote on wider more fundamental issues, including ‘moral’ ones.
Moorewatch has always been awash with threads about guns, religion, immigration and trade. I don’t think that makes the posters here gun nuts, religious wackos and xenophobic racists.
This seems to be another case of Bushitler as far as I can see. Exaggeration running amok. This is again why I hope something with actual substance comes along soon.
I’m reading a lot about “bitterness” everywhere these days and can’t help but wonder if it has anything to do with global warming.
I learned all about “acid rain” in the 80s which is almst solely produced by “unnatural” occurrences such as industrial activities in countries like the US. Not only does it lead to deforestation, death to fauna and flora, it can “melt” rock. Once airborne, it rains down on foreign countries and continents and severely harms them too. Just lok at Africa.
Global warming further cooks the acid rain to where it scorches the land even when its wet. At the same time global drought concentrates the acid rain making it more potent.
The US is easily responsible for ca. 25% of the earth’s CO2 and acid rain due to its insatiable thirst for profit and oil consumption. Furthermore its industrial waste flies far and wide across the oceans and continents, killing most everything n its path.
China is in a bit of a bind these days because it has always refused to buckle under to imperialism and capitalism. It has long stuck to developing its own standards and industries for its masses without buying flawed machinery from the decadent US. Alas, it does need some items Tibet has and currently can’t give up some of the resources there for fear of becoming capitalists themselves. That, and Tibetians believe in silly religious hocus-pocus a la US, so it really needs to be banished, eventually.
However its not okay for the US to “melt” ancient buildings and landmarks in foreign, sovereign countries for mere profit.
The US has seduced far too many other countries into paranoia of war, financial insecurity and peak oil, urging them to just watch - HAHA! - “reality” TV and buy Happy Meals and use their Google search tool, effectively distorting the fact that the US is the most evil entity on earth, ever, anywhere, anytime.
What you must do is buy bumper tickers to raise awareness, protest Google, but post some creative Photoshop mocking Americans on alternative sites, vote leftwing, wear kaffiyehs and dye your hair orange, avoid anything industrial by thinking green, even when you are the plane to your hard-earned Club Med vacation.
Thats when the bitterness will end; when we all burst forth in song under shade trees in a machine-free world, like our downtrodden Iraqi brethren used to until forced to sell this evil oil to survive.
CM’s response might have had a sprinkling of truth had Obama actually been speaking to Pennsylvanians living in Pennsylvania rather than a crowd of millionaires and billionaires on the other side of the country. And that’s assuming that I accept his premise that Pennsylvania is replete with half empty manufacturing towns.
CM, you do realize that DEEtroit, Flint and Benton Harbor are in Michigan and not Pennsylvania, right?
As it stands, CM shows that his bigotry toward middle America whitey is on par with Chance Obama’s.
In my experience half-empty towns ravaged by deindustrialisation do tend to harbour bitterness.
I think it was Bill Bennett, although I could be mistaken, that pointed out last week that it’s not the word “bitter” that has people arguing Obama is elitist. It’s the word “cling”. “Clinging” implies some kind of irrational childishness. “Clinging to guns and religion” implies that the practice of their First and Second Amendment rights is childish. In the context of a campaign speech, it also implies that by electing him president, they will no longer need to “cling” to those rights. He’ll make it all better.
The people in question have guns for a variety of reasons. A lot are hunters. Some enjoy competitive shooting. Many realize that they personally are the first and last line of defense for their home and family. These things are not childish, and these people know it.
When the people in question know that their belief in their religion is no different than Obama’s belief in his (both stemming from and branching to other legit questions, thanks to Rev. Wright), they realize they’ve been pinged by a hypocrite. He leverages his religious beliefs under useful circumstances, yet insult others’ faith when he thinks he’s off-the-record.
It gets even worse when you poke around Daily Kos or other such sites and find Obama supporters defending his words not by saying, “that’s not what he meant,” but, “why so hostile? It’s true!” Citizen-elitists supporting their elitist politician-of-choice. Sure, Obama has no control over these people. But he has appealed to them quite directly with his words.
The focus on the word “bitter” has been an effective diversion from the actual source of consternation. Don’t fall for the diversion.
Isn’t this about the same as when conservatives dismiss citizens of San Francisco as being left wing nuts? And just as boring? And just as much a non issue? Sure, stereotyping is bad and all, but surely the current outrage is a bit over the top, isn’t it?
Isn’t this about the same as when conservatives dismiss citizens of San Francisco as being left wing nuts?
Which conservative running for President is on audio recording calling citizens of San Francisco left wing nuts (or a more accurate comparrison, ‘bitter, homosexual treehuggers’)? You can bet your last dollar the MSM would make huge issue of such a statement.
Isn’t this about the same as when conservatives dismiss citizens of San Francisco as being left wing nuts? And just as boring? And just as much a non issue? Sure, stereotyping is bad and all, but surely the current outrage is a bit over the top, isn’t it?
In my experience half-empty towns ravaged by deindustrialisation do tend to harbour bitterness.
I think it was Bill Bennett, although I could be mistaken, that pointed out last week that it’s not the word “bitter” that has people arguing Obama is elitist. It’s the word “cling”. “Clinging” implies some kind of irrational childishness. “Clinging to guns and religion” implies that the practice of their First and Second Amendment rights is childish. In the context of a campaign speech, it also implies that by electing him president, they will no longer need to “cling” to those rights. He’ll make it all better.
The people in question have guns for a variety of reasons. A lot are hunters. Some enjoy competitive shooting. Many realize that they personally are the first and last line of defense for their home and family. These things are not childish, and these people know it.
When the people in question know that their belief in their religion is no different than Obama’s belief in his (both stemming from and branching to other legit questions, thanks to Rev. Wright), they realize they’ve been pinged by a hypocrite. He leverages his religious beliefs under useful circumstances, yet insult others’ faith when he thinks he’s off-the-record.
It gets even worse when you poke around Daily Kos or other such sites and find Obama supporters defending his words not by saying, “that’s not what he meant,” but, “why so hostile? It’s true!” Citizen-elitists supporting their elitist politician-of-choice. Sure, Obama has no control over these people. But he has appealed to them quite directly with his words.
The focus on the word “bitter” has been an effective diversion from the actual source of consternation. Don’t fall for the diversion.
His speech also had a little bit of that Obama racism thrown in too. Talking about because of people clinging to those things they won’t vote for someone who looks different. You know the whole under the table “If you don’t vote for me you’re a racist,” schtick Obama likes to slip in.
Isn’t this about the same as when conservatives dismiss citizens of San Francisco as being left wing nuts? And just as boring? And just as much a non issue? Sure, stereotyping is bad and all, but surely the current outrage is a bit over the top, isn’t it?
Is calling Obama an “elitist” really expressing “outrage”? Isn’t that a bit over the top?
It’s a case of politician who ostensibly wants to bring change, hope, and unity, insulting small-town people behind their backs to wealthy city-dwelling donors, then not realizing why it was insulting. In your analogy, quoted above, you seem to realize that what Obama said was insulting. Why shouldn’t it be analyzed?
Isn’t this about the same as when conservatives dismiss citizens of San Francisco as being left wing nuts? And just as boring? And just as much a non issue? Sure, stereotyping is bad and all, but surely the current outrage is a bit over the top, isn’t it?
Maybe… but San Fran is known for being highly political and partisan (and there is a lot of truth to the claim they are...) and the jab is at the people who are political and partisan. Whereas Obama is just talking about everyday people… most of whom are democrats…
Maybe… but San Fran is known for being highly political and partisan and the jab is at the people who are political and partisan. Whereas Obama is just talking about everyday people… most of whom are democrats…
Kimpost sounds tired almost like he’s survived going 12 rounds with corporate America. I’d say he’s handily earned a Club Med vacation thanks to his tireless sticking up for the prole masses, fer shurr.
Senator John McCain signaled his new fund-raising strength Sunday when he reported that his presidential campaign ended March with $11.6 million in its bank account after having raised more than $15 million that month.
Even though Mr. McCain remains far behind Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton in overall fund-raising and spending, his financial picture is changing from that of a scrappy and poorly financed underdog to a standard bearer whose political success is translating into financial success.
Still, a large financial gap persists between Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama, who has outraised and outspent all other candidates. Mr. Obama reported late Sunday in his federal filings that he had $51 million in cash on hand at the end of March. It is not known exactly how much Mr. Obama now has after spending millions on television advertisements and other campaign costs in the Pennsylvania primary, which will be held Tuesday. At the beginning of March, Mr. Obama had $31 million in cash on hand
To date, Mr. McCain has not gained much financial support from many big-money donors who had been the backbone of President Bush’s fund-raising effort, while the Democrats have made some inroads in core Republican business interests.
Last I heard Democats were typically poor, downtrodden, disenfranchised, homeless minorities made asthmatic via for-profit factory emissions, but with so many of them out there, thanks to big business, their sheer numbers are giving the minority Carriers of Hope for a Better Tomorrow a financial edge.
Until the KKKongloms artificially jack up the gas prices some more, anyway…
In my experience half-empty towns ravaged by deindustrialisation do tend to harbour bitterness.
I just got done making a post in the Heller/2nd Amendment thread where I said that every major problem in any major city in America can be traced directly to liberalism, and the “deindustrialisation” that you refer to is no exception. Like it or not, biafra hit the nail on the head when he sarcastically mentioned acid rain. Ohio and Pennsylvania were the two hardest-hit industrial states in the union when the anti-capitalist, anti-American environmental movement got a foot-hold in influencing national policy around the (phony, contrived) acid rain scare. “Deindustrialisation” was and is their goal, so it’s kind of surprising to see you, CM, refer to a successful effort as being a bad thing. I mean, those steelers in Pittsburgh didn’t destroy the American steel industry themselves. Their livlihoods and our economy came in second to the hysterical sky-is-falling unproven theory of acid rain, just as it is today with global warming. Liberalism “deindustrialized” that part of our country. Thus, to the extent that you and/or Obama are right that people there are bitter and have valid reason to be, it is Obama’s very ideology itself that spawned it.
But like others have said, the “bitter” remark is the least insulting part of what he said. People cling to guns, if they do indeed do that at all, because people like Obama and Billary have dedicated a large part of their careers to taking them away, with complete disregard and a palpable irreverence for The Constitution that gives them the authority to make any law in the first place. Upwards of 85% of Americans consider themselves religious to one degree or another, many to a large degree, and they find solace, hope, comfort and positivity in their faith. Why on Earth wouldn’t they “cling” to it? And what does it say about Obama’s faith that he doesn’t cling to his similarly? It says to me that his involvement in the church he chose was a political calculation and not an expression of any deeply-held religious faith in Christian doctrine. Many people in America feel that way about him, and when he denigrates true faith to a bunch of Daddy Warbucks in a smoke-filled room behind closed doors while twisting their arms for money so he can buy the presidency, whence he will commence further “deindustrializing” America in the name of empty rhetorical slogans about hope and change, well, folks are going to take notice and, hopefully, direct their bitterness where it belongs; right back at Obama, Billary and liberalism.
CM’s response might have had a sprinkling of truth had Obama actually been speaking to Pennsylvanians living in Pennsylvania rather than a crowd of millionaires and billionaires on the other side of the country. And that’s assuming that I accept his premise that Pennsylvania is replete with half empty manufacturing towns.
CM, you do realize that DEEtroit, Flint and Benton Harbor are in Michigan and not Pennsylvania, right?
As it stands, CM shows that his bigotry toward middle America whitey is on par with Chance Obama’s.
I assumed ‘cling to’ was in the context of the issues that people vote on. And that he was saying that there are people who don’t see any politicians offering them anything in the way of jobs or much of a future at all in terms of revitalising their town, so they vote on those issues instead.
I assume he was using Pennsylvania as an example, and that it could apply to loads of other places. In other countries it would apply too, although the issues being ‘clinged to’ might be slightly different.
If that makes me a bigot then obviously my definition of bigot is different to yours.
