When the little guy goes public *UPDATED*
Bookworm on Oct 16 2008 at 1:47 pm | Filed under: Barack Obama
We’ve become used to political dirty tricks aimed at those who stick their neck out and actually run for office (as well as their wives, children and unborn babies). However, Obama’s Chicago style campaign, media and fellow-travelers have used those dirty tricks to try to destroy an ordinary Joe. Sickening. Perhaps this is what it will take to make people understand that Obama is politics as usual only if your community bears an uncanny resemblance to Chicago or to politics in, say, Cuba, North Korea, Hiterlite Germany, Soviet or Putin-esque Russia, etc.
UPDATE II: Lee Cary also weighs in on the larger meaning of the MSM’s attacks on Little Ol’ Joe.
UPDATE III: Ace explains why the media’s savage personal attacks on anyone who threatens the Obama campaign stifle the free-flow of information relevant to voters in this election.
Email This Post To A Friend
64 Responses to “When the little guy goes public *UPDATED*”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yeah, now I’ve started a “Joe the Plumber Rumors” list.
See also my post on new kulaks.
Just start at the top.
Imagine if the press gave the same treatment to William Ayers and Raila Odinga.
>>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/acorn-peoples-platform-socialism-in-a-nutshell>>
Here’s another must read…
This should get planted everywhere…!
Darn…
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/acorn-peoples-platform-socialism-in-a-nutshell
Here is an update from Hot Air:
Good news: Toledo moves to shut down Joe the Plumber
http://tinyurl.com/4tq7xj
More protection for Obama.
Bloody amazing the alacrity with which dirt or alleged dirt was dug up on Joe the Plumber. Apparently the army ants of progressive politics can run a background check faster than you can say ‘the politics of personal destruction.’
Here’s another one…
http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/10/16/joe-the-plumber-its-socialism/#comment-17390
Well, if Joe loses his plumbing job some politician should hire him as a spokesman. He expresses himself more cogently than most in the trade.
It is amazing how people have focused on Joe and tend to overlook the primary issue here; that is Obama’s expressed view of the tax system as a blunt instrument of social engineering. His earlier statement that capital gains should be raised even if doing so would cost the government revenue–because it would be fair, fits hand and glove with his latest. Despite recent history, I think most Americans still cling to the notion that taxes are a burden borne for the sole purpose of funding necessary services. When expressed as starkly as Obama has, the idea of wealth re-distribution at the whim of a central authority becomes pretty damn ominous.
If McCain could express himself as clearly as Joe, he would be hammering the difference in governing philosophy using the words that Barack gave him, and Joe made part of the national consciousness.
Purging Joe the plumber?
Would Joe be thrown off the rolls if he registered in Ohio today?
The Toledo Blade reported today that “Joe the Plumber’s” name appears on Ohio voter registration rolls with a slight misspelling — as Worzelbacher, not Wurzelbacher.
And that sort of data-entry error might be enough — were Joe a new registrant — to have him disqualified from voting in Ohio, Florida, or Wisconsin this year, depending on the outcome of ongoing litigation.
Purging voters or blocking their registration because of data errors is disenfranchisement by typo,” said Michael Waldman, the executive director of the Brennan Center for Justice, a liberal legal group involved in litigation in those states. “Joe is a perfect example. If he were a new voter, he would be being challenged right now as not eligible to vote.”.
“Joe the Plumber is not committing voter fraud by having his name spelled differently on two different lists,” he said. . . .
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Purging_Joe_the_plumber.html
>>Bloody amazing the alacrity with which dirt or alleged dirt was dug up on Joe the Plumber>>
But we still haven’t seen an original birth certificate for Obama …
What’s it going to take?
Not to worry. ACORN has registered 27 Joe the Plumber’s in 6 states. Every one a Democrat too.
>>Well, if Joe loses his plumbing job some politician should hire him as a spokesman. He expresses himself more cogently than most in the trade.>>
Heh. McCain would be smart to do exactly that…pay him whatever he’s been making and take him on the road to talk about taxes and how they affect him. And maybe talk about how he could get disenfranchised for having an incorrect spelling of his name, but if he’d reregistered and picked up an absentee ballot – he’d be fine – even if he’d already registered. Or how about the effectiveness of a system that knows he doesn’t have his plumbing license, and the fact that he can’t work without it – legally – but I’ll bet he can find an illegal who’s working the trade – with no papers at all…
And just exactly what is the justification for requiring him to have a license when his boss has one for the business and is responsible for making sure all requirements are met? Other than collecting $$$$ I mean…
>>Purging voters or blocking their registration because of data errors is disenfranchisement by typo,” >>
He could still vote, Oz…. _provisionally_
Subject to later verification.
I worked at a polling place for a couple of years. We got instructions on how to take provisional votes…
I was so disgusted with Obama today. I wasn’t sure I could be more disgusted with him but lo and behold, I was.
I sat there and listened to Obama mock Joe Wurzebacher at one of his rallies, saying something along the lines of, “Have YOU ever heard of a plumber who makes $250,000?”
You know what? It is none of his damn business. This just infuriates me. You would think that Obama would want to court people like Mr. Wurzelbacher but no – he feels perfectly at ease making fun of him.
How fast the Obama campaign was at trying to poke holes in this man and his life.
Shame! Shame!!
The distinction between the Obama Campaign and Politico may be a litte subtle, but it wasn’t the Obama campaign directly — it was Politico directly. Notice what Jonathan Martin says:
Emphasis mine, of course. But notice what he’s saying: Politico had someone looking up the property tax records of a guy who Obama picked out of a rope line for a question, because the answer turned out to be one that went badly for Obama.
Politico is as biased as any web outfit I’ve read. It’s more biased than the mainstream media web sites. This is fine, except for the usual huge problem: They claim objectivity. I don’t go to Politico anymore.
“Joe the Plumber” has been extraordinarily useful for publicizing Obama’s “spread the wealth” comment. He’s been doing loads of interviews since the big Obama slipup. He’s made himself a legitimate object of investigation by seeking maximum publicity, hasn’t he? The question for me is, *when* did the MSM start going after him?
The larger issue is (of course) how thoroughly the MSM is going after him, while they never went after the Ayers, Wright, Rezko issues. This story offers more clarity on the outrageous double standard of our “objective” media.
Thank you, MSM “objectivity” liars! Every indicident such as this pulls the curtain back a little more, gives the American public more evidence of your unreliability and your “objectivity” lies.
Once this massive deception settles deeply into the American psyche, the playing field will begin to be levelled. The 2008 campaign may be the very last one where your average Americans believe they’re getting “truth” from ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, and so many newspapers. I hope conservatives can pull together an effective “What They’re Not Telling You” campaign to help drive a stake into these monsters’ hearts. It’s necessary, and the time is ripe, to set the playing field for 2010. I’d love to watch the mainstream media squirm and screech as the stakes are pounded in!
Last night on CNN, the talking heads were blaming the McCain campaign for not “vetting” Joe the Plumber, which justified the media frenzy which allowed them to effectively change the subject.
Instead of talking about socialist redistribution policies, we’re talking about tax liens and business licenses, at least they are.
Rhetorical question here– Has the left ever done anything for which they are ashamed of or take blame for?
Thank you, SueK for setting Ozzie straight. Provisional ballots can be turned in for people named Humpty Dumpty.
Anyway, my comments on Joe and the MSM:
http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=1906
http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2008/10/the_politics_of.html
Those that read Oz’s youtube claims of McCain stoking up hate should read that.
I said at that time, solely on my own intuition and background in the knowledge of warfare and propaganda, that I had my suspicions and I took it, not with a grain of salt, but as simply propaganda. Their or ours, doesn’t matter and it didn’t matter in determining my views of whether McCain stoked up rage or not.
First, to the “Hate Rally that Wasn’t” astroturfing. I use this term quite deliberately, though it doesn’t fit literally. Let me explain why.
Astroturfing, strictly speaking, is a formal propaganda campaign undertaken under false pretenses: a carefully orchestrated campaign designed to intentionally create the impression of a spontaneous, grassroots phenomenon when in reality events have been carefully staged to further a political agenda. Think of the Romans seeding a crowd with fake peasants who yell out the same phony rallying cry to whip up the masses at just the right moment and you won’t be far off.
Perhaps someone can tell me how much that scenario differs from this one:
1. One man – one man! – yells out “Kill him!” at a McCain rally, referring to a white, domestic terrorist named Bill Ayers. Despite the fact that the Secret Service and several other journalists who were on the scene corroborate the man was referring to Bill Ayers and not Barack Obama, the NY Times and Associated Press go on to say he threatened Barack Obama. This, of course, becomes the dominant narrative and launches a Secret Service investigation.
I use both inductive and deductive reasoning. They are able to derive and produce conclusions that are extremely accurate. Far more accurate than the intuition of an Oz or the reasoning of a Leftist.
Hey Book, if somebody asked you if the Left would have treated Joe, before all this happened, with kindness and compassion, wouldn’t you have used your intuition, sourced from how your life experiences Book, to intuit how the Left would treat him? And wouldn’t you also use deduction to deduce how the Left would treat him based upon your philosophical assumptions and premises on Leftism and the veracity of their philosophy?
The accuracy of one’s reasoning or intuition is a very solid sign of the truth of your assumptions and beliefs.
If you had said that the Left and Democrats would have treated Joe the Plumber well because he is a plumber and the Left is multicultural and tolerant, Book, then you would have been proven wrong, eh? But you wouldn’t have said that. You wouldn’t have predicted that for you know very well how the Left treats apostates and heretics.
Malkin, Now And Then
On the press and “Joe The Plumber”:
…a dirty, desperate war against Joe Wurzelbacher is on. The left’s political plumbers are attacking the messenger, rummaging through his personal life and predictably wielding the race card once again. It’s standard operating procedure for the Obama thug machine. … Left-wing blogs immediately went to work, blaring headlines like “Not A Real $250k Plumber!” Next, they falsely accused Wurzelbacher of not being registered to vote—he’s registered in Lucas County, Ohio, and voted as a Republican in this year’s primary. …
In 2007, on the kid called Graeme Frost, cited by Democrats in defense of S-CHIP:
“A word for all the faux outraged leftists accusing conservative bloggers of waging a “smear campaign:” Asking questions and subjecting political anecdotes to scrutiny are what journalists should be doing.
When a family and Democrat political leaders drag a child down to Washington at 6 in the morning to read a script written by Senate Democrat staffers on a crusade to overturn a presidential veto, someone might have questions about the family’s claims. The newspapers don’t want to do their jobs. The vacuum is being filled. If you don’t want questions, don’t foist these children onto the public stage.”
Oz…do you _really_ think these two situations are comparable?
Ozzie: You understand that even if Joe was a mass murderer, the problem was Obama’s answer, not Joe’s question, right? In the case of the S-CHIP kid, he was supposed to be the living face of the need for that kind of legislation,except that his life bore no relationship to the propaganda. In other words, his identity went directly to the point he was being held up for. Joe’s identity is irrelevant to the words Obama spoke. Killing the messenger doesn’t change the fact that Obama said he wants to socialize America.
My neighbor has also gone public. I have lived on a sleepy little street in NJ just 7 miles from the Delaware River for the past 30 years. There are about 20 houses on my street, and the only people who turn onto my street are the residents and the garbage truck.
So there was hardly any point in displaying political yard signs. We had our own polite version of “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
Then in 2004 a newbie moved in. The new family — horrors! — had a yard sign for every Democrat running, including of course Kerry/Edwards. I guess they must have noticed that no one else had any yard signs and thought “oops.” This year they have one modest sign for our open House seat. And that’s it.
So you can imagine my shock this evening when another neighbor, no newbie here, had multiple McCain/Palin signs out front. Now here is an interesting thing. This family is very prominent locally and in the Jewish Community here. The “man of the house” is a Trustee for Life of our local Jewish Community Center.
The reason I mention this Jewish angle is I am thinking that Jesse Jackson’s (and others’) premature celebration that under an Obama Administration, US foreign policy towards Israel will change might have finally sunk in.
Or maybe it is because, as Medical professionals (husband & wife) operating their own business, they can relate to Joe the Plumber!
Ellie2 (#24)
Nah, Ellie, they put those signs up in their yard because they’re just racists! You’re putting far, far too much thought into it!
Please report to the nearest re-education center promptly. The Barack Obama Unity Effort To Save America will not tolerate the loss in community organizational efficiency that is caused by dissent. The issues are too important! – The crisis too dire! – The emergency too threatening! – to let you continue any further down your darkening path. America is at risk and in grave danger, and your failure to participate correctly as an American is deeply disturbing. We love you too much to let this happen to you.
It’s also been reported to us that you called your recent 60% increase in taxes “unpatriotic”. When you report to your local center – for your zip code, that would be the “Saul Alinsky Memorial Cooperative Educational Reorientational Center” that opened a month ago (April of 2010) – we’ll find out the truth of whether you’ve made such a regrettable statement.
“Nah, Ellie, they put those signs up in their yard because they’re just racists!” Mike
I know you are being facetious, but you have zeroed in on the problem: Jews must be Liberal and above all supportive of Blacks because they know what it is like to be oppressed.
My neighbor’s sign gives me hope that some Jews (maybe those higher on the alertness scale) are awakening to the fact that the Black/Islam/Arab coalition is a threat first to Israel and then to the rest of us.
First comes Saturday, then comes Sunday.
You understand that even if Joe was a mass murderer, the problem was Obama’s answer, not Joe’s question, right? – Book
I see your point.
Although I think his answer was in line with what he’s been saying all along: that he plans on raising taxes for those making over $250,000 a year and wants to close tax loopholes for corporations.
I live in a swing state and the McCain campaign is already running ads, using that sound bite along with Biden’s quote about it being patriotic to pay taxes.
I’m not sure how well it will play.
One thing I have noticed, however, is that many people seem to be voting against the ticket that scares them most, rather than FOR anyone.
>>…many people seem to be voting against the ticket that scares them most, rather than FOR anyone.>>
Ok…so the ticket that scares me is the socialist/Marxist ticket – Obama.
What is it about McCain’s ticket that might scare people? To be honest, I haven’t heard much from him except that he’s going to reform Washington by eliminating corruption (an admirable but probably fruitless effort) and lower spending by Congress (possible maybe – if he’ll use his veto pen on both R and D spending efforts) and thereby, lower taxes.
Any other promises you’ve heard?
What is it about McCain’s ticket that might scare people?- suek
Of the people I’ve talked to, many see McCain as a warmonger, and say he seems “out of it,” while many dislike Palin for several reasons. (She lies about nearly everything, she admited to not even thinking about Iraq, she hasnt given a single press conference, when she does speak to the press, she displays ignorance and a lack of understanding, she uses divisive language that appeals mostly to the base, and she was chosen to cater to the Relgious Right).
Before the Palin pick, my only concern with McCain is that he’d widen the war and bring back the draft. I think we’re going to have war with either candidate, however, and that both parties will continue to cater to special interests at the expense of the American public.
That said, I also believe that we’re headed for pain and hardship that neither candidate will be able to avoid.
But Palin was the deal-breaker for me.
Ozzie,
Leaving aside your ignorance about what the “religious right” believe and want, and your lies about Palin, it was Obama, not McCain that said he’d invade Pakistan.
Is he NUTS?
This is what Pakistan thought of that:
Pakistan is a fragile democracy– if you want to call it that, and that statement ranks as one of the most irresponsible statements ever coming from a presidential candidate and show why inexperience matters– unless Pakistan has some inside information from Obama that he didn’t really mean it, akin to his public statements on unilaterally renegotiating the NAFTA agreement with Canada, while he privately told the Canadians he didn’t mean it.
While both want to move the war from Iraq to Afghanistan, at least McCain has a clue what he’s talking about.
Leaving aside your ignorance about what the “religious right” believe and want, and your lies about Palin, it was Obama, not McCain that said he’d invade Pakistan- Brains
We’re already in a war with Pakistan, Brian.
It’s already on.
McCain merely said he won’t telegraph his intent.
Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region.
Is he NUTS? – Brian
In case you missed it:
Bush ‘approved’ Pakistan attacks
President George W Bush has authorised US military raids against militants inside Pakistan without prior approval from Islamabad, the BBC has learned.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7611287.stm
And this:
LA Times:
Bush’s third war
LA Times:
U.S. attacks inside Pakistan mark an escalation that may bedevil the next president
September 27, 2008
President Bush will leave office without concluding either of the two wars he initiated after 9/11. Now, in the waning months of his administration, the president seems intent on expanding his “global war on terror” still farther. To the existing fronts in Afghanistan and Iraq, he is adding a third: Pakistan.
Eclipsed perhaps only by Iraq, Pakistan ranks in the very top tier of the Bush administration’s foreign policy blunders. Even as it vowed following 9/11 to never compromise with evil, the administration wasted no time in forging an alliance with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, the army general who seized power in 1999 through a military coup. Although Musharraf was anything but a democrat, Bush proclaimed him a close friend and ally. Washington quickly began funneling military and economic aid toward Islamabad, the total since 2001 exceeding $13 billion. .
As measured by return on investment, Musharraf turned out to be a lousy bet. By the spring of this year, with Musharraf’s days obviously numbered, the Bush administration abandoned its friend and ally. In doing so, it found itself without a policy as far as Pakistan was concerned.
To fill the void, Bush turned to the Pentagon. Nearly seven years into the Afghan war and five years into the Iraq war, Pakistan has become the next problem that the president intends to solve through the application of armed force. Without congressional authorization and almost entirely shielded from public view, a new war has begun.. . ”
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-bacevich27-2008sep27,0,4559985.story
So earlier this week, there were numerous reports on the following:
“Even as the U.S. confronts two long wars, neither Sen. John McCain nor Sen. Barack Obama believes the country should take the politically perilous step of reviving the military draft.
But the two presidential candidates disagree on a key foundation of any future draft: Mr. Obama supports a requirement for both men and women to register with the Selective Service, while Mr. McCain doesn’t think women should have to register.”
So:
- BOTH candidates have indicated that they consider it “perilous” to revive the military draft.
- However, Obama actually supports requiring both men and WOMEN to register for the selective service.
And what does Ozzie say? She is concerned about McCain because he will “bring back the draft.”
Unbelievable.
Here is just one source regarding Obama’s thoughts on selective service:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08287/919582-470.stm?cmpid=elections.xml
It’s interesting the ideas for improvement that one can come up with when one has never had any experience in or exposure to a particular field.
“McCain merely said he won’t telegraph his intent.”-Ozzie
For that reason alone Obama is not qualified to be president.
Surely the commander-in-chief should understand that you don’t telegraph your intent in a time of hostilities.
Obama’s irresponsible remark demonstrates he doesn’t understand the delicate nature of relations with potentially incendiary Muslim countries.
BOTH candidates have indicated that they consider it “perilous” to revive the military draft.
- However, Obama actually supports requiring both men and WOMEN to register for the selective service.
And what does Ozzie say? She is concerned about McCain because he will “bring back the draft.”
Unbelievable.- Deanna
Why is that unbelievable?
Before the Palin pick, that was my original concern with McCain, yes. And I thought maybe, just maybe, Obama would scale back war in Iraq, not go into Iran and we’d not have to go there.
That was before we started a war in Pakistan, too.
Despite what peope say about the surge, a new report says that violence in Iraq will probably worsen. And Afghanistan is taking a turn for the worse. So now I think that regardless who is president, we’ll have war on three fronts, alongside economic hardship we’re not accustomed to
I dont care what the candidates say about the draft.. Look what they’re saying about Pakistan, as if a war hasnt already begun.. They’re both lying about Georgia, too. Since 2000, states have been linking drivers licence applications to voter registrations, which tells me that they’re shooting for more compliance for some reason.
I’m pessimistic regardless who wins..
But, in the end, Palin was the reason I decided to stay away from McCain.
For that reason alone Obama is not qualified to be president- Brain
You dont think the people of Pakistan and its’ leaders dont already know we’re at war inside Pakistan?
As usual, the American people are the only ones who don’t know.
Presdient Bush has already started the policy you said would be CRAZY.
“As usual, the American people are the only ones who don’t know.
Presdient Bush has already started the policy you said would be CRAZY.”
Ozzie, you really can’t be that obtuse.
And no, I said Obama was NUTS.
Ozzie, you really can’t be that obtuse.
And no, I said Obama was NUTS.- Brian
You’re acting as if what Obama said about Pakistan was ridiculous, ignoring the fact that President Bush is already doing exactly what you said Obama was NUTS to even suggest.
And then you said Obama cannot be Commander in Chief for telgraphing a policy that is already in effect. The people of Pakistan (along with much of the world) already know what’s happening inside Pakistan.
>>But, in the end, Palin was the reason I decided to stay away from McCain.>>
Do you know something about McCain’s demise that the rest of us don’t know? You seem pretty confident that he’s going to die during his term, should he be elected…
>>And then you said Obama cannot be Commander in Chief for telgraphing a policy that is already in effect. The people of Pakistan (along with much of the world) already know what’s happening inside Pakistan.>>
Do you really think that our actions in Pakistan are without the knowledge and permission of those who are in power in Pakistan? Are you aware that most of the supplies we send to Afghanistan go through Pakistan? And that if Pakistan declared war on the US – or assumed that we were at war with them – they’d cut off our supply routes?
But you apparently think it’s a good idea to openly state what US intentions in the region might be? Pakistan’s people in power are trying to walk a tightrope. It may seem ridiculous to us, but there you have it. Mussharaf tried, and failed after some success…how long this government will be in power is anybody’s guess.
Sure. And why don’t you _know_ what Iran is doing in the area??? Could it be…possibly…that they _don’t_ openly state what their plans are…considering Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon…Hezbollah, Muztada el Sadr, etc.? They only thing they openly state is that they intend to destroy Israel. Oh well. Just talk, right?
Do you know something about McCain’s demise that the rest of us don’t know? You seem pretty confident that he’s going to die during his term, should he be elected…- suek
That would be the worst case scenario, suek, but, with the Palin pick, MCain catered to the group that he once called “agents of intolerance” and even gave them a hand in drafting the GOP platform.
“Do you really think that our actions in Pakistan are without the knowledge and permission of those who are in power in Pakistan” – suek
Yes. I do.
Here’s another article from the Washington Post
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19383.htm
“But you apparently think it’s a good idea to openly state what US intentions in the region might be?” suek
Given that we’re already doing what Obama said he might do, I think the whole thing is ridiculous. But that’s the way it always seems to work with U.S. foreign policy and the American public.
“They only thing they openly state is that they intend to destroy Israel. Oh well. Just talk, right?’ – suek
Did you catch any of Christiana Annapour’s interviews with five former Secretaries of State? And see what they had to say? Obama was correct about Henry Kissinger’s assessment:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/kissinger-backs.html
You apparently are that obtuse.
Even if special forces are making incursions into Pakistan, it doesn’t help American policy by announcing your intentions to turn it into stated official policy.
Unless, of course, his intentions were merely to try and convince the voters he’d be a tough commander-in-chief, in which case, he should have said he supports the administration efforts in Afgahnistan, but doesn’t think they go far enough.
I assume he was implying regular forces would go in. That’s also a whole different ball game.
These are real, live American soldiers he appears to be using for the purposes of campaigning.
Do you know something about McCain’s demise that the rest of us don’t know? You seem pretty confident that he’s going to die during his term, should he be elected…-suek
That would be the worst case scenario. But in choosing Palin, McCain catered to the same peopel he once deemd “agents of intolerance” and even invited then to help draft the GOP platform.
“Do you really think that our actions in Pakistan are without the knowledge and permission of those who are in power in Pakistan?” -suek
Yes. I already posted articles from the BBC and LA Times, but here’s another from the Washington Post:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19383.htm
“But you apparently think it’s a good idea to openly state what US intentions in the region might be” – suek
Given that they’re already underway, it doesn’t matter.
“Oh well. Just talk, right?” suek
Despite McCain’s assertions, Henry Kissinger said that the US shoudl sit down with Iran. Colin Powell wil most likely endorse Obama tomorrow. Five former secertaries of states feel that diplomacy is the way to go.
War with Iran (as we continue to fight wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan) would be a disater.
Even if special forces are making incursions into Pakistan, it doesn’t help American policy by announcing your intentions to turn it into stated official policy.- Brian
The rest of the world know what we’re doing, Brian.
The song and dance is for Americans.
Ozzie,
Do you agree with the policy stated by Obama, that he will send US ground forces into Pakistan, with or without Pakistan approval, if we think we know where bin Laden is?
Despite McCain’s assertions, Henry Kissinger said that the US shoudl sit down with Iran.
He didn’t say that the US should sit down with Iran without preconditions. Stop the propaganda, Oz, for once.
Ok, this is going nowhere. Since you’re comfortable with Obama’s military policies, let’s tack just a bit.
As I understand it, you object to Palin, not because she is a Christian, since you’re OK with Obama’s Christianity and his statement that Christians don’t need to leave their religion at the political door, and OK with the convenant theology of Frank Schaeffer, but because Palin is a dispensationalist.
You claim to know what they believe and what they want- to create a Christian theocracy.
How many dispensationalists do you personally know?
Unbelievable.
Reality, objective truth, and people matter to you Deana. That is why it is unbelievable.
Ozzie,
Do you agree with the policy stated by Obama, that he will send US ground forces into Pakistan, with or without Pakistan approval, if we think we know where bin Laden is?” Brian
Fomer CIA honcho Robert Bauer believes that bin Laden is dead.
But that aside, we are already going into Pakistan without Pakistan’s approval.
From the article you cited:
“Obama triggered anger in Pakistan, a key ally of the United States in its war on terror, when he said in a speech Wednesday that as president he would order U.S. military action against terrorists in Pakistan’s tribal region bordering Afghanistan if intelligence warranted it”
From the LA Times article I cited:
.
“Nearly seven years into the Afghan war and five years into the Iraq war, Pakistan has become the next problem that the president intends to solve through the application of armed force. Without congressional authorization and almost entirely shielded from public view, a new war has begun.. . ”
Whether the next president is Obama or Mccain, he will continue the policies that are already in effect.
“You claim to know what they believe and what they want- to create a Christian theocracy- Brian
I watched the legislation in 2004-2005. That was enough for me.
“How many dispensationalists do you personally know?” Brian
I’ve know a few, Brian, but once people start talking about things like the Rapture, I feel much as I would if a Muslim talked to me about Allah or a Scientologist talked to me about Xenu.
Faith is a private matter, it has no place in polite conversation or public policy.
Despite McCain’s assertions, Henry Kissinger said that the US shoudl sit down with Iran. – me
He didn’t say that the US should sit down with Iran without preconditions. Stop the propaganda, Oz, for once. – Ymar
Kissinger said that discussions with Iran should begin right away, with high level (i.e. Secretary of State level) diplomats.
Kissinger said that discussions with Iran should begin right away, with high level (i.e. Secretary of State level) diplomats.
Which is not the same as Obama saying meetings with no preconditions met.
Faith is a private matter, it has no place in polite conversation or public policy.
Talk about intellectual snobbery. It’s like certain dinner parties in new York City’s ton during WWII when the women would never talk about all the gory killings and deaths suffered in war for the cause of patriotism during polite conversations.
No, faith is not a private matter, Oz. Not to you. For you have done as any person devoid of intellectual honesty would do in characterizing the private opinions of other people. You just make it up as you go along.
If it is so private, how do you know about them even after meeting them: you wouldn’t.
War with Iran (as we continue to fight wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan) would be a disater.
What’s wrong with disasters. If you can have fun destroying arguments and other people’s efforts to create a better world, Oz, why would war be such a bad thing in comparison to the other bad things you think is going to happen?
Discussions of God and faith and morality are fascinating.
Discussions on the End Times and what ail happens to those who dont believe the Bible as the literal truth are impolite.
And, in my mind, thsi type of fundanetalism has no place in government.
And I’ll always vote against it,
“How many dispensationalists do you personally know?” Brian
“I’ve know a few, Brian…” – Ozzie
Do these folks want to establish a Christian theocracy?
Discussions on the End Times and what ail happens to those who dont believe the Bible as the literal truth are impolite.
So give us a conversation you actually had and describe the people who actually had this conversation of the “End Times”. Can you reproduce, as close to verbatim as possible, their arguments and your responses?
Do these folks want to establish a Christian theocracy?- Brian
No. I’m not worried about everyday Americans. I’m worried about the politically active Religious Right.
Some are concerned about Socialism. I’m not.
I’m concerned about the Relgious Right, others are not.
Can you reproduce, as close to verbatim as possible, their arguments and your responses? – Ymar
Are you kidding me? You’ve never met someone who believed in a literal interpretation of the Bible, who tried to convince you that it was the Gospel truth, as they say?
Having a conversation with someone who believes that they will be Raptured, while peopel like me will be tormented (and most likely burn in hell) is, by its very nature, rude.
Ozzie #48:
Faith is a private matter, it has no place in polite conversation or public policy.
This statement is at the crux of the disagreements we see above in the comments and in American politics.
Ozzie’s position on faith mirrors the overwhelmingly dominant theme in Europe for decades. It has been present in American politics and society for the same period, but has *not* been dominant here. If anything it’s a draw. Through most of the country, religion and faith continue to be central to communities, excepting those communities that seem to require organizers.
Take Ozzie’s profoundly deep hostility towards the religious and towards faith, add on a massive dollop of her faith in the U.N., and you have the European attitude expressed perfectly. That’s done such a lot of good for Europe, and it’s gonna do *wonders* for things here too.
>>That’s done such a lot of good for Europe…>>
Nature abhors a vacuum…
If you don’t have one religion, you’ll have another. In Europe, it’s rapidly become apparent that with Christianity weakened, Socialism doesn’t fill the gap, and both will be replaced with Islam, who, it seems, which has the only believers left.
“Having a conversation with someone who believes that they will be Raptured, while peopel like me will be tormented (and most likely burn in hell) is, by its very nature, rude.”- Ozzie
I have now have a clear idea what Ozzie hates about the “religious right”.
Those who believe their is a God that has revealed himself throughout history and the written record is a sacred text called The Bible, and that it is authoritative since the scriptures calls it “God breathed”, and that Jesus is God incarnate, who from the foundation of the world had a plan to bridge the chasm between God and man following our rejection of his principles through his substitutionary death on the cross, and furthermore that each human will give an account for his or her deeds, the central question of which will be “What did you do with my Son, Jesus, Ozzie wants to see driven from the public square.
“Discussions of God and faith and morality are fascinating.”- Ozzie
As long as these discussions assume God is unknowable and there is no such thing as free will.
“Having a conversation with someone who believes that they will be Raptured, while peopel like me will be tormented (and most likely burn in hell) is, by its very nature, rude.”- Ozzie
I’d glossed over that one! My only concern with someone convinced that I’m on my way to hell is whether they have any intention of hurrying me on my way there. As long as I’m destined to burn, you know, “let’s give you a little taste of it while you’re here on Earth”.
Ozzie seems to think that that describes Sarah Palin. I on the other hand don’t see anything like that in Sarah Palin at all. I find her highly introspective in ensuring that she’s never trying to speak for God.
In fact, when in the past I’ve found myself immersed in mileus where far-left liberalism has held sway, I came away from it thinking I’d just lived through hell on earth. The ennui, despair, and licentiousness, the through-and-through emptiness lurking just underneath the surface of it all… the forced hilarity, smiles, and loud conversation of people bound and determined to convince themselves that, yes, they were in fact having one hell of a good time, thank you very much.
[...] up October 20, 2008 October 20, 2008 Via Bookworm Room, Ed Morrissey has some ideas on what it means when the media tries to destroy “the man Obama [...]