• gpc31

    Barack Barry Hussein Dunham Soetoro Obama — Who is he?
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZmJhMzlmZWFhOTQ3YjUxMDE2YWY4ZDMzZjZlYTVmZmU=

    Future denier: Oh, but we didn’t know about him.

    Response: You didn’t want to know so you didn’t look

  • Danny Lemieux

    I believe that I am already beginning to see this process happen among my in-laws.

    Question to my in-laws in 2012: “Who did you vote for last time?”
    Answer: “mumble, mumble”.
    My follow-up response: “Let me help you remember!”

  • Oldflyer

    What surprises me is that I still see quite a few Obama 08 bumper stickers. I would expect people to be scraping them off by now.

    I have done an individual analysis of the bumper sticker displays since the election. Those on cars driven by blacks (is that the correct term this year?)I understand. Most of the others are on Volvos or yuppie style SUVs & vans. Those I would think would have started having buyer’s remorse by now.

  • George Bruce

    The analogy to post war Germany is cute, but not accurate. After the war, there were quite a few unrepentant Nazis, but they were mostly underground or in South America, except for the ones in the East who were hired by the Commies to form the Stasi. Contrast that with the situation in American post Obama in which the Commies will still be in control of our universities, many charitable trusts and foundations, many churches, many government agencies and departments and the media. Those people still like Fidel. I can’t imagine them ever turning on Barry, unless he became a conservative.

  • Zhombre

    I have to agree with GB. That’s a good one-liner but a bad analogy. I deplored the Nazi references applied to Bush & Cheney and have grown no fonder now that the Empty Suit is President. And I agree there’s still a cultish liberal/progressive O-ring of supporters who won’t turn on their idol.

  • http://bookwormroom.com Bookworm

    I doubt Scipio intended to compare Obama to Hitler. I certainly didn’t. I think his point was, as mine is, that it’s very likely in a few years that many middle of the road people will be trying to forget that their night of political drunkenness back in 2008 never happened. Some votes we stand by with some regret. Some votes we’re too embarrassed to admit ever happened.

  • Danny Lemieux

    Perhaps a better analogy would have been Harry Truman. Whereas Truman left office with record low approval (Korean war, etc.), it’s hard to find anybody today among our illustrious Democrat seniors who will admit having opposed him (“Give ‘m hell, the buck stops here…Harry!”).

    Whoops! Then again, maybe that analogy belongs to G.W. Bush. Obama will do wonders for Bush’s image.

  • George Bruce

    I didn’t think Scipio was comparing Obama to Hitler. I understood the analogy very well. I just didn’t think it was a good one. And I voiced my opinion to make what I regard as an important point. While the post war period in West (not East) Germany did result in a pretty decent, but not perfect, purge of unrepentant Nazis from positions of power and influence, the same will not be true of America. Even if Barry pulls an LBJ, the leftists will still remain in control of much of the commanding heights of our culture. Give them a couple of years to lick their wounds and they will come at us again with a fresh set of talking points and sound bites, and maybe with a wise (and more attractive) Latina.

  • http://bookwormroom.com Bookworm

    I’m sorry, George, unlike you, I wasn’t clear. I thought your point was a good one (and understood it right away). I was just trying to make clear that I wasn’t trying to continue the Bushitler legacy by making an Obamahitler comparison. I was comparing the voters, not the politicians!

  • Deana

    I’ve noticed that all of those Obama bumper stickers that were EVERYWHERE last year are no where to be found . . .

    I think the point was well made – no one is going to admit to voting for this guy when it is all said and done.

    I’ll be like Danny – I’ll help them remember!

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    Good for you, Deana.

    Never let em see you sweat. Make em sweat instead.

    Btw, the city you had that crash in wouldn’t have happened to be Chicago, would it? The comment you left at Neo’s blog recently about police encounters.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    The Germans were shamed by their Hitler history because we made it so.

    Until Obama’s entire philosophy is defeated, not compromised with, the same will not happen when people perceive the Obama Years.

    You see, you have to make people ashamed before they act ashamed. They don’t feel ashamed when they can feel proud or victorious or bitter or anything else.

    You have to force them, give them no choice and no out in the matter. No mercy to the cruel.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    http://grimbeorn.blogspot.com/2009_07_01_archive.html#1532394774221396748

    That video is pretty funny. Not in a laughter manner, but in a weird manner. CHcek it out.

  • SADIE

    Ymarsakar

    Creepy is the word that comes to mind.

  • Deana

    Y –

    No. The accident was in Raleigh. The man who ran over the front of my car happened to have “connections” in the police department and State Bureau of Investigations. Two weeks after the accident, the police came back out to my house at midnight where the accident happened (the accident happened at 3 in the afternoon).

    After investigating the “evidence on the ground” (what evidence? The accident happened 2 weeks before and there was nothing to see – a million people had driven by in that period – nothing was the same.) the police’s accident report was altered to deflect blame from the the man who hit me.

    My insurance company said that that sort of thing was “most unusual.” Indeed.

  • Mike Devx

    Ymar #13,

    I actually was laughing out loud as I watched that video.
    Can’t take it seriously, sorry. Not into numerology either.

    In one way I find an analogy between Obama and Lucifer/Satan to be appropriate.
    Lucifer is thought to be the most beautiful, pleasing, and persuasive of all the angels. The corruption and evil within him is completely hidden externally. Undetectable. That’s why he’s ‘The Father of Lies’. Which is why the gruesome, or dark or twisted images of him are so dangerous, because NOTHING could be further from the truth of physical appearance. (At least, to this agnostic, that is my perception.)

    So, actually, it should be a great relief that Obama requires a teleprompter to speak even simple phrases as if he means them! The Father Of Lies Does Not Require a Teleprompter. :-)

    Ymar, would you engage in any deception or lie, or promote any belief even if you objected to that belief, if such a promotion would damage your enemy? In other words, when engaging in propaganda against your enemy, do you have limits?

    I’m not assuming your answer by leading the question… I honestly have no idea what your reply is going to be, should you choose to answer.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    Ymar, would you engage in any deception or lie, or promote any belief even if you objected to that belief, if such a promotion would damage your enemy? In other words, when engaging in propaganda against your enemy, do you have limits?

    Deception is a tool like any other in war, but deception mostly consists of the truth, not of lies. Most propagandists already know that the best way to deceive is to tell the truth, mostly. It is the ‘mostly’ part that gets people.

    It is easier to convince people if you can back up your claims with the truth than to fabricate something out of whole cloth. The latter requires quick thinking and high maintenance. There are ways to see through it with a little research or time. Thus any advantage from a lie is only temporary. The truth is still the best policy, and this includes when deceiving people with half-truths, withholding of information, or some other variation.

    Obama has already demonstrated that you can get people to believe you and you only have to tell them what they want to hear. You don’t have to make up any convincing case. You could be caught on tv saying the exact opposite a day later, or 10 days before, and it wouldn’t matter. Because people will deceive themselves, all you have to do is to nudge em in the right direction.

    This, however, is only of tactical importance. On the strategic and logistical scale, it doesn’t carry the field. There will be times when your word will determine the outcome of a battle or the fate of an enemy on the strategic level. There will come a time when people’s trust in you will become a logistical resource, every bit as valuable as munitions, bombs, and food.

    But you don’t know when it will happen. You can’t manage things in a propaganda operation to get the intended result. War isn’t designed to allow people to ‘manage’ it. Only people are designed that way.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    I don’t know why I would be promoting a belief if I didn’t believe it myself.

    Well, I suppose you could make the case about pacifism or Revealed Religion, but I’m not promoting it, I’m just defending their right to exist.

    The problem with lies is that if you use them too often, it becomes a habit. A bad habit. But more importantly, in war you must maintain your objectivity. You must never confuse your propaganda and arguments with the unvarnished absolute truth. But if you keep lying, you’ll start to lie to yourself as well. And that will destroy your ability to make judgments in an objective fashion.

    This is particularly dangerous for people in positions of ower. Their authority tends to insulate them from the rest of reality. And if they happen to continuously live in a world crafted by their own lies, then it is very easy for them to simply start on the path of self-deception and never come back. For, after all, aren’t the worlds we construct out of fantasy much better than the reality we must face?

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    I also forgot something. You can deceive plenty of people by telling them the truth, but not the whole truth. You just leave something out and they then jump to a conclusion, an erroneous conclusion. That takes a lot more skill than to just make something up on the spot.

    The best propaganda crafted from lies, things you construct knowing that they aren’t true, actually tends to take days. Like any group project. Most people think lies are crafted on the spot by individuals, but that’s wrong. That’s not how it is done. Well, it’s not if you want to do it right. Do it so that nobody can uncover the truth in the time, where when they do discover it, it’ll be like Stare Decisis.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    Static update for Mike in case he missed it.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    My insurance company said that that sort of thing was “most unusual.” Indeed.

    Corruption is, indeed, most unusual in a society that favors transparency, honesty, hard working virtues, and integrity.

    Then again, change the society into one in which ultimate power comes from the seat of government and you will get a bunch of Aristocratic courtiers buttering up the “King” for all power accrues from the King, after all.