Patterico's Pontifications

It’s a really silly cover and the “controversy” it has inspired is even sillier.

David Ehrenstein (85002c) — 7/14/2008 @ 8:23 am

Try this link for the New York Times op-ed.

nk (8eafa0) — 7/14/2008 @ 8:33 am

Satire, and pander.

aphrael (12fba5) — 7/14/2008 @ 8:34 am

Satire, and pander.

Concise. Accurate. Nothing else needs to be said.

JD Esq. (75f5c3) — 7/14/2008 @ 8:46 am

The New Yorker: A variation on “They’re going to try to make you afraid of me.” Putting out the most extreme anti-Barack Que-Bonitos-Ojos-Tienes Obama view in order to marginalize it by the time of the election. Barack Whom-Do-I-Throw-Under-The-Bus-Next Obama should be thanking them for illustrating his point.

nk (8eafa0) — 7/14/2008 @ 8:48 am

Keep Our Politics Clean!!!

Say No to B.O in 2008!!!

BT (78b929) — 7/14/2008 @ 9:03 am

If you read the story, it’s an in – depth look at Obama’s rise to power, with numerous accounts of the many people he literally ran over (rather than throw under the bus) in his quest for the Senate seat. For those of us in Chicago, it’s a well – known tale, but for the rest of the country it may come as a revelation. Just more grist for taking away that mantle of changieness and hopieness – the guy’s nothing more than an old line Chicago Machine Hack.

Dmac (416471) — 7/14/2008 @ 9:03 am

The Obamanation is a “Nation of Whiners”…

Somebody please change BO’s diaper and find his pacifier…

MikeN

Mike1957 (d1de05) — 7/14/2008 @ 9:14 am

Lots of smoke and fire over the cover, which as others point out caricatures his own preemptive race card play in Jacksonville.

Perhaps it is , besides an ideal victim card play for Obama, trying to hide what is in the article inside.

Via AceofSpades

The New Yorker has a big article on Obama. I haven’t read it all yet but there are some interesting excerpts out there already.

Here’s Obama from a 9/19/01 speech.

We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.

We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad. We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent. Finally, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globechildren not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and within our own shores.

I guess my thought that the attacks were carried by evil thugs in furtherance of a murderous ideology would be viewed as insufficiently nuanced by Obama.

daytrader (ea6549) — 7/14/2008 @ 9:16 am

Now all we need is a New Yorker cover satirizing some of McSame’s greatest moments: looking befuddled as doughy Likud imperialist Joe Lie-berman has to correct him yet again about a particular Midwest fact; or McSame lying about the chronology of his unseemly dumping of his injured first wife so that he could pursue the pulchritudinous Cindy, many years his junior; or McSame, for all the world looking like an obsequious little boy, pitifully hugging Commander Bunnypants, smug and imperious, who looks as though he’d just as soon kill the flip-flopping curmudgeon as embrace him (this, of course, after sliming him in the 2000 primaries). Ah, the possibilities are endless.

BigIslandDave (ac8aad) — 7/14/2008 @ 9:36 am

BigIsland – Haven’t they already done that?

If not, they must be slipping.

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/14/2008 @ 9:40 am

Is this not a tired, old, and ineffective trick? Making stupid sketches of Obama and trying to cast him as a muslim does not make him a one. Oh I forgot, it’s a parody. But we get the message and it aint funny!

love2008 (0c8c2c) — 7/14/2008 @ 9:53 am

Don’t put it beyond the New Yorker to question who Obama really is. Others in the MSM are already doing that, including ABC and the Washington Post. There is still a lot of support for Hillary in NYC and a hidden hope she still could become the Democrat nominee.

The liberal media is most careful when they might misportray one of their own. This was not an accident.

Corky Boyd (25d228) — 7/14/2008 @ 9:58 am

I wonder whose interest these people are trying to serve. In an effort to mock the republicans, they end up shooting Obama on the foot. Not a smart move. If anything, it gives the advantage to McCain.

love2008 (0c8c2c) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:03 am

How dare The New Yorker treat the presumptive messiah like a, a, a Republican!!! *snort.*

509th Bob (dfa1f1) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:04 am

In post No. 9, that should have read “Mideast fact.” Of course, Johnny Boy is pretty much befuddled everywhere he goes …

Oh, and Corky: There’s no such thing as the “liberal media.” That misnomer is merely the convenient invention of aggrieved individuals with feverish minds. If you doubt me, just look at CNN, Faux News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, etc. etc. All corporatist, all conservative, all destructive to our national discourse. Oh, and add the Post and the NYT to that list. All major cheerleaders for the Iraq debacle.

BigIslandDave (ac8aad) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:05 am

Here’s a great satirical cover image for McCain — emphasizing his “Family Values.”

David Ehrenstein (85002c) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:14 am

All major cheerleaders for the Iraq debacle.

BigIsland – You have obviously been asleep for the past four years or not reading or listening to the media sources you cite. When they even acknowledge their own liberal bent it’s nice to see others fruitlessly continuing to carry water for them.

There are issues other than Iraq BigIsand, but being in a slumber, you may not have noticed. Try categorizing you media outlets as nonliberal without blushing on those and I’ll wager you can’t do it.

Clinging to the nonliberal media myth!!!!

Full meme ahead.

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:21 am

I don’t recall the MSM raising a stink any of the times (note “times,” plural”) that cartoonists portrayed Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice as an Uncle Tom or Aunt Jemima stereotype as punishment for being a black woman in the employ of a Republican administration.

But when Obama is the subject of the lampooning, out come the MSM’s knives.

This is why it brings a smile to my face when I read about daily MSM layoffs. Whenever a liberal “journalist” has to go home and tell their kids that Santa may not be coming this Christmas, it is entirely their own doing.

The Hound (56479d) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:23 am

Hey cretin puny porker dave-
what alternative universe do you live in? did you watch the various debates on tv between urkel, breck girl and sHrillary or between the ‘Pubs?

Perhaps the media is not quite as far left as those whom you worship whilst inhabiting the fever swamps of DU, Kos Diary, Huff or moron.org, but if one is objective and reads what nonpartisans says about the media, they are in the tank for Obambi. Why is it that Rather was obessed with the phony Bush TANG story and media gave nearly no attention to charges made against Lurch by Swiftboaters? Even your so-called leftist O’Reilly condemned the swiftboaters and deemed Kerry a national hero.
So continue to fester in your own little bubble fantasizing about Urkel while masturbating and dream on about Bush being hanged for crimes against humanity.
We have looked at the media and they suck as much as you do. There is no objectivity. It’s opinion masquerading as news and constantly being spun.
Oh yeah, the NY Slimes has served the war effort so well by revealing national security secrets and putting abu graib on front page nearly fifty times? Go do the anatomically impossible thing or return from whence you came since your village is missing its idiot savant.

madmax333 (28cf4c) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:25 am

If you read the story, it’s an in – depth look at Obama’s rise to power, with numerous accounts of the many people he literally ran over (rather than throw under the bus) in his quest for the Senate seat. For those of us in Chicago, it’s a well – known tale, but for the rest of the country it may come as a revelation. Just more grist for taking away that mantle of changieness and hopieness – the guy’s nothing more than an old line Chicago Machine Hack.

Having read the full New Yorker story, I have to say that I respect Obama more now than before I read it. You can’t say he’s all speeches anymore. You can’t say he he’s too young or inexperienced — the guy was made for the presidency. He’s a tactical genius, and a spectactular alliance-builder and strategic planner.

Most importantly, he’s demonstrated an ability to learn, adapt and beat politicians at their own game at every level (except the highest — so far). In a world where the U.S. isn’t the sole, lumbering superpower anymore, that’s exactly the kind of person we need leading us.

Regardless of who wins this election, barring some tragedy, Obama will be a major figure in our country’s history for the next few decades.

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:26 am

Don’t rip on BigIslandDave for believing the media is conservative. That thinking among liberals should be encouraged.

Conservatives are rightly dropping their subscriptions because they’re sick of liberal bias. If liberals want to drop their subscriptions because they think the media isn’t liberal enough, don’t get mad at them. Don’t correct them.

Encourage them.

At the end of the day, it accelerates the MSM’s much-deserved layoffs, and may even give the Star Tribune and the others on the edge the final push they need to do the world a favor and shut down.

Cancel your subscriptions, BigIslandDave! And tell all your friends to do the same!

The Hound (56479d) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:28 am

And here’s what a former Jesuit priest has to say about Obama.

David Ehrenstein (85002c) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:29 am

You’re right, madmax: Bush (and Cheney) should be tried for war crimes. I’ll settle for life imprisonment instead of hanging.

We’ve become a torture nation under Wanton Boy. And a nation that allows the treasonous outing of a CIA agent. Are you proud of that? Apparently so.

“Cretin puny porker”? That’s a new one. Oh, you reich-wingers are a laugh riot!

Oh, by the way, my “alternative universe” is the reality-based community. You should visit sometime. You’d have to take your blinders off, though. 😉

BigIslandDave (ac8aad) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:37 am

I found this:
“From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That’s how many days the Senate was actually in session and working. After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World, and fill the shoes of Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK and Ronald Reagan. 143 days. I keep leftovers in my refrigerator longer than that.” Columnist Cheri Jacobus

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:41 am

BigIslandDave, your talking points are stale, you need to find newer, fresher ones. Smarter ones are obviously a forlorn hope.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:42 am

BigIsland – Your alternate universe is the community based reality, not the reality based reality. There is not such thing as the latter for you folks as the hive mind you move with creates its own reality and facts.

The word “corporatist” gave you away. Who the fuck uses language like that and what postmodern meaning does it currently hold? Seriously dude.

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:45 am

I didn’t know Karl Rove had the kind of pull needed to get this kind of cover and article run at the New Yorker.

You magnificent bastard.

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:46 am

Obama’s response to 9/11 shows that he is stuck in obsolete leftist nonsense about terrorism:
“The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair. ”

What a load. The 9/11 hijackers were among the more affluent of their societies, upper class and Western educated.

Obama definitely is completely clueless about the modern world and the Middle East.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:59 am

I guess we were a ‘torture nation’ under Teddy Roosevelt, when we employed the ‘water cure’ much more extensively in the Phillipine campaign than
in the current instinct. Yes, they convicted Andrew Glenn, but they promoted almost every mid level officer involved in that campaign. And none of those folks were responsible for the deaths of 3,000 Americans, like KSM. “Reichwinger” and
‘wingnut’ by the way, is the tipoff that you’re not serious. Sometimes information cannot be extracted by techniques at the bottom rung of the
scale of tactics. Although my understanding of EU
interpretations of civil rights, mean simple detention can be read as ‘cruel and unusual’. We’ve punished most of those directly involved in excessive force in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib, mostly because they exceeded their authority. I’m always struck how the ‘reality based’ community is always in favor of Hezbollah over Lebanese
liberals, mullahs over the Iranian people, Syrian and Iraqi Baathists over the common people, Taliban over the Afghans. That comes through every simgle time. They are also the descendants of those who would have recognized Mao deep during the Cultural Revolution, who all but cleared the path of Pol Pot’s Year Zero, and who a generation before that, genuflected before Lenin & Stalin, and followed in lockstep while he embraced Hitler. Who take every fault that America has ever made; to rally to those who would
exterminate us from the face of the earth if they could. Beatty’ Reds is instructive in this regard showing how the likes of Reed and co,followed the
Soviets into the slaughterhouse, while the likes of Emma Goldman, the first neocon?? showed the
extent of their delusion. Now Barry Dunham is like a living compilation of all these trends from
support or at least acqiescence from Hamas and the FARC today, to Ayers’s petty efforts at insurgency, two decades ago. It’s ironic to note
that at least one of the Weatherman’s targets was breached (the Pentagon) and their was an attempt against another (Ft. Dix) by the Islamist successors to the Weatherman.

narciso (d671ab) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:03 am

SPQR, the New Yorker story is great in that it highlights how Obama rose to that senate seat.

What’s so amazing about his story is that he really has no built-in connections to get him to where he is. Yet he was able to turn that political machine into a successful Senate run in ten years.

Obama has eleven years of experience as a legislator. Interestingly, George W. Bush was actually running for governor of Texas when he was the age Obama is now. He was elected governor of Texas with virtually no public service experience, and made the decision to run for president five years later.

In other words, when Bush was elected president, he had less experience in government than Obama does today.

I’m not saying Bush is the standard by which candidates should be measured — obviously not. Just saying that the experience card really doesn’t play well for Republicans in light of their most recent choices.

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:08 am

Well, Democrats have a history about complaining about civil liberties during national crises:

This is from a Democratic Party platform:

“…the subversion of the civil by military law…; the arbitrary military arrest, imprisonment, trial and sentence of American citizens…; the suppression of freedom of speech and of the press; the denial of the right of asylum;… is calculated to prevent a restoration of the Union and the perpetuation of a government deriving its just powers from the consent of the government.”

The above is from the Democratic Party platform of 1864. Democrats’ timing is always impeccable.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:08 am

Phil, your comments are great satire. Truly genius comedy. I couldn’t write anything more hilarious no matter how hard I worked at it.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:09 am

SPQR, it’s not satire. In 2000, Republicans really did elect a president with three fewer years of experience than Obama. I know it’s hard to believe, but it’s true.

Of course, now we’re in a crashed economy, up to our necks in debt, and fighting multiple wars at the same time. It may seem like satire, since the Onion predicted it all along:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28784

But it really is true.

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:24 am

17, Hound, MSM liberals don’t believe in CHRISTmas, just the Winter Solstice and in Entitlement.

PCD (5c49b0) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:25 am

Good Allah. A little Petranos Esp and MKDP and we would have the full complement of krazy.

JD Esq. (75f5c3) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:31 am

In 2000, Republicans really did elect a president with three fewer years of experience than Obama.

Experience in what? Kissing Mayor Daley’s butt? Feeding off the public trough and swishing some of that slop over to his wife? And still not being able to put fresh fruit on the table for his children? Or to pay off his student loans?

How about experience in flying fighter jets? Managing an oil company? Owning a Major League baseball team? Governing a state?

nk (8eafa0) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:34 am

No, Phil, if Obama is elected President, he will be the least accomplished President in US history.

I’m surprised to learn that your comments were not satire. They certainly sounded like the best of satire. It was hard to believe you took yourself seriously. It still is.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:36 am

JD Esq.,

I never call myself Esq., Esquire, or anything other than Attorney at Law. But I am proud of my law degree and if you keep this up, I think I will start calling myself Dr. nk, J.D. 😉

nk (8eafa0) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:37 am

Phil, I know of some remedial math books you might be interested in. Just a thought.

I love the NY cover. Hilarious. WE have all read the story of Obama from the Houston paper by the guy who first told the story. That’s where we read the story of how the Illinois Senate leader said, “I’m gonna make me a senator.” And he did. Partly by putting Obama’s name on a lot of bills that he had nothing to do with. That’s how he got his “experience” that Phil is so impressed with.

Mike K (f89cb3) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:40 am

Herr doctor, nk, J.D.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:41 am

Comment by nk — 7/14/2008 @ 11:37 am

What, you weren’t on that thread callin’ yourself Esq too? 🙂 (don’t remember but maybe you were) Every time I see JD’s new “appellation” I think of how completely they lot of you pwned the Honorables on that thread. Funny stuff.

no one you know (1f5ddb) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:43 am

SPQR #38,

In fact, my Spanish-speaking clients did address me as “Doctor”.

nk (8eafa0) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:49 am

nk, J.D.,

I’m not a doctor, but I play one for the government. Er, WAIT! I AM a Doctor! Just like you!

Calling Dr. Kildare! Calling Dr. Kildare.
(Why won’t the Bold turn off?!?)

509th Bob (dfa1f1) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:53 am

His experience that impresses me most isn’t his experience introducing bills, etc. It’s showing up in Chicago, as an outsider, and becoming a U.S. senator for Illinois — one one of the biggest states in the country — in just over a decade.

Scoff if you want — I’m just saying it impressed me. Maybe I’m easily impressed — but you haven’t told me anything about YOUR accomplishments that imporesses me.

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:55 am

He became Senator by default after, all too coincidentally, his opponent’s sealed but juicy divorce records got splashed all over the newspapers. So Obama got a standin Republican from the outer fringes.

Matter of fact, that’s pretty much Obama’s M.O. He got the state Senate nomination by suing everyone else off the Democrat ballot.

Wonder how he’s going to get McCain off the ballot. Seems like the divorce thing won’t work, and suing over native-born status probably won’t work. Maybe he’ll get struck by lightning.

Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:05 pm

He became Senator by default after, all too coincidentally, his opponent’s sealed but juicy divorce records got splashed all over the newspapers … He got the state Senate nomination by suing everyone else off the Democrat ballot.

There’s no question he uses a lot of strategy in his campaigning, including mastering the technicalities of election law. In fact, arguably, he did the same thing to Clinton, to a degree, by working the caucus process better than she did.

You can call it “winning by default” if you want to ignore the intelligence behind it. The fact is, he’s extremely smart and he sees the big picture. He’s been running for president since his first public office, and even before.

On one hand, people who don’t want him to be president claim he’s cheating. But seriously, what is he doing that anyone else couldn’t/wouldn’t do, too — if they’d only thought of it?

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:16 pm

Phil, you’re claiming that Bush, then the longest serving governor in Texas history (and a person involved with large businesses and a veteran), had less experience in 2000 than Obama (a 16 month senator and community organizer of a now worsened slum)?

Hmmm.

It’s still funny how you’re running Obama against Bush instead of the most unlike-Bush Republican that posed a serious campaign and isn’t Ron Paul.

Anything Obama has, Mccain has better, when it comes to a resume. Mccain has actually made shit happen. Obama had a place on his resume printed as Chicago was corrupted by Rezko, and Obama usually votes ‘present’ if at all.

Obama’s seriously weird upbringing and adult beliefs is a funny thing to put on the new-yorker. Funny because it’s a tabboo to talk about it. Obama is no Muslim, that I realize. But he has a philosophy that very few would vote for… if only we were allowed to discuss it.

Juan (4cdfb7) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:24 pm

Wanton Boy, far and away the worst president in U.S. history, a complete and utter buffoon, has lowered the presidential bar for all time. If a degenerate loser and failure like him can get into the White House, anybody can — and that includes Sen. Obama, who has more intelligence in his thumbnails than Shrub has in his entire waste of a body.

Of course, the smirking simian stole two elections to get where he got. Oh, well.

BigIslandDave (ac8aad) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:24 pm

Phil said: “Obama has eleven years of experience as a legislator. Interestingly, George W. Bush was actually running for governor of Texas when he was the age Obama is now. He was elected governor of Texas with virtually no public service experience, and made the decision to run for president five years later.

In other words, when Bush was elected president, he had less experience in government than Obama does today.”

Pass me what you are smoking please. I’d love to have some of that, to make this idiotic comparison. Just to remind you, governors are the executive branch, you know, like the presidency… You know, the kind of experience that in current politics is pretty crucial. I’ll add that I’m horrified that none of the candidates running have this type of experience. But again, pass that stuff to me next please.

G (722480) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:27 pm

Phil if by just over a decade you mean 20 years, you are right. I’m pretty sure he showed up in Chicago in ’85. And of course much has been made of his 20 year association with Trinity United (in Chicago). I always thought a decade was 10 years. But I went to public schools.

joe (0df0af) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:31 pm

Hey Kids, Wow. Great cover. LMAO. Although I’m a little saddened the Obama campaign is yet to see that that the ultra-liberal New Yorker has given them a nice tool with which to lampoon and dismiss these myths and make those responsible for them seem even more desperate, mean, intellectually bankrupt and just plain crazy.

In truth, I don’t think it goes far enough; Obama should be holding a copy of the Communist Manifesto and a Saudi Arabian birth certificate proving he’s the half brother to Osama Bin Laden and Michelle should have the blond locks of a scalped white woman hanging off the nozzle of her Ak-47.

THAT would be hilarious.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:37 pm

Caligula made his horse a Senator. Mayor Daley did the same thing with Barack Put-Down-That-Skillet-Michelle Obama. Hopefully, the bar for President is a little bit higher.

nk (8eafa0) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:40 pm

I’m pretty sure he showed up in Chicago in ‘85.

I was counting his post-Harvard-Law years. But you’re right, he did have the three-year stint there in the 80s as well, although he wasn’t in politics at the time.

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:53 pm

But he has a philosophy that very few would vote for… if only we were allowed to discuss it.

I had a feeling this would eventually need to be addressed as it is a tiny bit unnerving.

I believe your speaking of the fact that Obama only eats the egg whites part of an egg (scrambled)?

Alright. So let’s talk about it. It’s weird but if you think about it it does makes sense. The yolk has tons of great protein, but too much Cholesterol, we all know that, so if you’re going to be eating eggs regularly because you have a very active lifestyle. Eating scrambled egg whites is a healthy way to do that. It gets you that same healthy shot of protein w/o the cholesterol or the saturated fats and with less calories.

There. It’s out now. I hope this settles it.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/14/2008 @ 12:55 pm

Juan #45 It’s still funny how you’re running Obama against Bush instead of the most unlike-Bush Republican that posed a serious campaign and isn’t Ron Paul.

Actually, I was somewhat relieved that McCain got the nomination, because he was my top choice in the Republican field (other than Paul).

I like his fairly reasonable stances on immigration and torture, and his willingness to tell-it-like it is to the folks in Michigan (damn right your Ford and GM jobs aren’t coming back).

It was so disturbing watching the Republicans try to out-do each other in their support for torture, war, and elimination of human rights, during the primary. Those were some scary guys.

So to put it in perspective, if I can’t have a libertarian candidate, these Obama and McCain are the guys I would have chosen myself from the field of candidates on both sides.

The problem is, McCain may not be like Bush in certain areas, but he hasn’t said anything since the primaries to make me think he isn’t like Bush. If he would start really speaking up about fiscal conservatism, I would be interested.

For example, if he were to criticize the way we’re bailing out Fannie and Freddie like a bunch of socialists, I would be pretty tempted to switch. But he won’t. Socialism for big banking corporations — just no socialism for poor sick people, right?

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:07 pm

The New Yorker cover is obviously satire, so over the top that no one can take it at face value. It is a work of near-genius that everyone should be able to laugh at. Except, perhaps, a certain politician and his supporters who need to lighten up.

Bradley J. Fikes (ebbbbd) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:15 pm

Oh my god there’s competition out there for Levi in the category of most juvenile one-dimensional sniveling douche – straight from the Big Island…!! Reich-wingers? Oh my lord that one’s right up there with doing stand up and using “I just flew in and boy are my arms tired…” For his next act Dave will use the term “Rethuglicans.” Also throw in the “Bush is dumber than…” with associated hyperbole to allow mock indignation serve as the automatic trump card against dissecting any credentials or accomplishments. Good one Island Boy!

Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:22 pm

Senor Klompus – Good to see you around again. Your Fillies are on fire.

JD Esq. (75f5c3) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:28 pm

No, obtuse one, I don’t use the term “Rethuglican.” Just as I’m sure you don’t use the hackneyed phrases “tree hugger,” “moonbat,” “commie,” “feminazi” and “pinko.” Right?

Oh, and while we’re at it: Name one salutary Bush accomplishment. Just one. (And, no, “kept us safe from the terra-ists” doesn’t count, because it’s not true. Destroying the Constitution isn’t an act of safeguarding or protection.)

(Sound of crickets chirping.)

Still waiting …

BigIslandDave (ac8aad) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:33 pm

Socialism for big banking corporations — just no socialism for poor sick people, right?

This is the dark secret of the GOP and few on the “free market” Right have the intellectual honesty to admit that the Republican party is, indeed, socialism for the rich and that the much ballyhooed Free Market is not free.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:33 pm

On one hand, people who don’t want him to be president claim he’s cheating. But seriously, what is he doing that anyone else couldn’t/wouldn’t do, too — if they’d only thought of it? – Phil

Jeez, isn’t one Nixon enough?

Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:38 pm

Oh, and while we’re at it: Name one salutary Bush accomplishment. Just one. (And, no, “kept us safe from the terra-ists” doesn’t count, because it’s not true. Destroying the Constitution isn’t an act of safeguarding or protection.)
(Sound of crickets chirping.)
Still waiting …
Comment by BigIslandDave — 7/14/2008 @ 1:33 pm

You don’t wait long before declaring others silent, do you? 🙂

Anyway, I’ll name five, just as a start (am sure others have more):

1. Roberts on the Supreme Court

2. Ditto for Alito

3. Masterful handling of the embryonic stem cell issue, and promotion of adult and placenta stem cell use

4. Spearheading massive increase in AIDS funding to Africa

5. Doing his utmost best to keep us safe from terrorists (hey, just because YOU preemptively ruled it out doesn’t mean it isn’t true)

no one you know (1f5ddb) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:40 pm

Destroying the Constitution

feeling a little histrionic today, are we?

no one you know (1f5ddb) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:42 pm

Don’t miss the 4th Amendment much, eh?

BID

Alito and Roberts — who basically lied during their confirmation hearings when they said they’d largely be neutral arbiters without an ideological ax to grind — are terrible justices. If they keep up their dismantling of established legal precedent, they’ll be right up there with Fat Tony Scalia (fixer of the 2000 Selection) and that disengaged cipher, Sleepy Thomas.

BigIslandDave (ac8aad) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:49 pm

And oh my gosh, HOW could I forget?

6. One of the great accomplishments of his administration: the support, promotion for and signing of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.

no one you know (1f5ddb) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:50 pm

Aggressive ignorance in this island fellow.

JD, not a J.D. (75f5c3) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:51 pm

Some context:

The artist of the Obama cover, Barry Blitt, has had 43 illustrations published in The New Yorker since 1994, most of them on the cover. Blitt’s covers often display a leftist bent, which is not surprising considering the direction the mag took when former editor Tina Brown took it over in 1994. Previous to this cover, his most incendiary piece appears to be his June 1996 re-imagining of the famous V-J Day kiss with two liplocked sailors. IMHO, his March 2007 Iwo Jima-like raising of the Stars & Stripes at half-mast in an Iraqi desert alongside an overturned vehicle seems infinitely more offensive than the “green” Time parody in which the soldiers raised a tree.

Blitt’s other covers include a depiction of Dick Cheney and George W. Bush as Oscar Madison and Felix Unger (aka The Odd Couple); a Bush cabinet meeting in the Oval Office with everyone chest-deep in water; a wheelchair-bound veteran arriving at a VA hospital only to find there are only stairs and no ramp; Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda mullahs evading the bombing of Afghan caves on Segways; a slouching, golf club-clutching, Beetle Baileyesque GWB as ANG slacker giggling at his debate opponent, giant-jawed John Kerry, resplendent in majestic medal-laden dress white Navy uniform; a perplexed then-Senate candidate Hillary Clinton wearing both a Yankees and a Mets cap as the 2000 Subway Series loomed; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. having difficulty hailing an NYC cab.

Not all of Blitt’s covers have their roots in political controversy. Some of them are thought-provoking, even hilarious: a toddler standing in a bedroom doorway snapping his startled parents — or, at least one of them — with his cell phone; air bags deploying in Coney Island bumper cars; a woman in a Central Park jogging path on a stationery Nordic Track; steroid-bloated Barry Bonds, big enough to be visible from aircraft as he stands in left field; the proverbial monkeys at typewriters with agonized facial expressions as they fight writers’ block; a businessman who, rather than use his cell phone to conduct business on the run, walks the streets with his desk and its contents tethered to him.

What’s notable to me is that before the cover of the current edition was named “The Politics of Fear,” The New Yorker doesn’t seem to have deemed it necessary to title the cover illustrations. To me, that says one of two things; either the satiric content of the picture was too strong to be properly perceived, or the satirist(s) concede(s) that not everybody is savvy enough to “get it.” I think the latter is the case — not because people aren’t smart enough to figure it out, but they are blissfully unaware The New Yorker‘s target audience is Gotham’s liberal elite. Don’t be too surprised if young, new BDS sufferers out of the know throw in The New Yorker with Fox News and Rush Limbaugh.

L.N. Smithee (d1de1b) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:51 pm

L.N. – The thin skinned Obama’s and their campaign are apparently pretty offended by it, although Barry O had no immediate reaction to it when it was shown to him. As usual, he had to wait for someone else to tell him what to think about it. He’s for shit without a script.

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/14/2008 @ 1:59 pm

Comment by BigIslandDave — 7/14/2008 @ 1:49 pm

Well, sir, you simply asked for one accomplishment and I gave you six. That you don’t consider President Bush’s accomplishments to be accomplishments was no surprise. What was surprising, I guess, was your continued demonstration that you think assertion equals argument. Would be happy to continue to discuss with you when you have something other than name calling to offer.

no one you know (1f5ddb) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:01 pm

I still remember one of the most controversial covers in the New Yorker’s tenure under Tina Brown – a depiction of a Hasidic man kissing a black woman, in the midst of the racial troubles going on in the city at that time. Makes this cover look fairly tame by comparison, IMHO.

Dmac (416471) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:02 pm

I do find it pretty amusing, actually, that BigIslandDave called Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas a “cipher” and called him “Sleepy.” Is it because he doesn’t speak much when hearing argument? Listening skills are a very valuable thing when trying to, you know, reach an important decision in a courtroom (or even comment on a blog thread 🙂 ) , and those who listen a lot learn a lot.

I wonder, too, if BigIslandDave has actually read any opinion of Justice Thomas’, since I didn’t think it was possible to read his opinions and still call him a “cipher.”

no one you know (1f5ddb) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:07 pm

More classic gems from our new favorite trollbot:

“Wanton Boy, far and away the worst president in U.S. history, a complete and utter buffoon…”

That’s hilarious! Wait, wait, I got one – “Chimpy McSmirkton, the warmonger
who’s controlled by puppet master/Halliburton/bloodforoil/Cheney,
who’s too stoopid and a big poopy pants, and oh yeah his mother smells too…”

Pure Comedy Gold.

Dmac (416471) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:10 pm

That’s hilarious! Wait, wait, I got one – “Chimpy McSmirkton, the warmonger
who’s controlled by puppet master/Halliburton/bloodforoil/Cheney,
who’s too stoopid and a big poopy pants, and oh yeah his mother smells too…”

Comment by Dmac — 7/14/2008 @ 2:10 pm

LOL

no one you know (1f5ddb) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:13 pm

no one, feeding trolls is usually a waste of time and they keep coming back for more. I know, it’s tempting but think about arguing with a tree to get the idea.

I’ve had my differences with Bush. He should have vetoed spending but that idiot, Hastert, thought it was going to guarantee a Republican Congress as far as the eye could see. They don’t understand their own voters. Too much time in DC.

The new book Grand New Party has a lot of good ideas.

I also hate Bush’s (and McCain’s) blithe willingness to accept millions of poorly educated illegals. I’ve spent 40 years caring for them and know how foolish that policy is.

He could have fought a better fight on Social Security and his communication skills should have led him to take up another field of work but, all in all, he will come out alright in history.

Obama scares me. Hillary looks not-so-bad in comparison. He is an empty suit.

Mike K (f89cb3) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:18 pm

I know, it’s tempting but think about arguing with a tree to get the idea.
Comment by Mike K — 7/14/2008 @ 2:18 pm

hahahaha Good point.

I too have differences w/ Bush (and think he’s made many mistakes too) but I think he’s basically a very good, honest man and a good President. And he puts the good of the people of this country ahead of his own wants, desires and even political gain, and he’s proved it over and over again during his terms. (Another president who shall remain nameless, whose main concern seems always to be his “legacy,” for that very reason won’t fare so well in history IMO.)

I think your comment

He could have fought a better fight on Social Security and his communication skills should have led him to take up another field of work but, all in all, he will come out alright in history.

is right on the mark. I think history, on balance, will be very, very kind to George W. Bush.

no one you know (1f5ddb) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:26 pm

BigIslandDave spit:

Alito and Roberts — who basically lied during their confirmation hearings when they said they’d largely be neutral arbiters without an ideological ax to grind — are terrible justices.

And YOU are the arbiter of what makes an arbiter neutral? It is to laugh.

If they keep up their dismantling of established legal precedent, they’ll be right up there with Fat Tony Scalia (fixer of the 2000 Selection) and that disengaged cipher, Sleepy Thomas.

I don’t know what you’re referring to specifically when you speak of “established legal precedent” that must be adhered to above the language of the Constitution, and I doubt you know either.

And another thing — if you’re so against a cipher wielding so much power, you won’t be voting for Obama. Right?

L.N. Smithee (d1de1b) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:27 pm

The wonderful nickname “Wanton Boy” comes courtesy of Studs Terkel.

So fitting! If Bush weren’t such a cruel and dangerous man, his unvarnished idiocy would almost be amusing. Tragedy, meet farce.

“Chimpy McSmirkton”? Hey, your words, not mine. Points for effort.

OK, gang, it’s been fun observing your own “aggressive ignorance.” Amazing, actually. I’m glad you’re happy and content being part of a dwindling segment of the population — the blissfully deluded who still cling to the fiction that George Dubya Bush is a true chief executive/statesman and not the puerile “Accidental President,” as The Economist sagely called him a few years back.

BID

BigIslandDave (ac8aad) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:31 pm

BigIslandDave is full of namecalling but devoid of any substance.

As for Phil, what Phil calls “strategy” the rest of the nation calls dirty tricks.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:32 pm

Watching leftists debate is like watching seals sprint.

Lots of flapping and barking, but they never really get anywhere. And having your balls scraped over the ground repeatedly can’t be much fun.

But then again, self-flagellation is the only sport they’re much good at.

(other than spitting on the flag and giving out phony awards to actors, academics and journalists to undeserving and untalented hacks who spout the “message”…they really don’t engage much in competition)

McCain is not a mirror image of President Bush, but Obama sure smells like leftover Jimmy Carter.

cfbleachers (4040c7) — 7/14/2008 @ 2:59 pm

“The wonderful nickname “Wanton Boy” comes courtesy of Studs Terkel.”

Having worked with Studs during my days as an ad sales guy at WFMT – FM in Chicago, I can tell you that Studs is charming and intelligent, a terrific author, is always direct and never boring. But Studs has been, and always will be, from the far – Left Lunatic Fringe. He was a WPA guy from wayyy back, and his political leanings tend to be to the left of Trotsky. Don’t believe me? Just ask him, he’ll be glad to tell you all about his preferences. So better luck next time, using a guy for that source just further undermines your own credibility.

Dmac (416471) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:02 pm

If Patterico ever decides to allow original cartoons on this blog, I have an idea for the first one:

Side-by-side panels; on one side an over-the-shoulder view* of Phil who is looking hungrily at The Daily Kos on his computer screen; on the other side the same view of BigIslandDave staring with anticipation at Media Matters on his screen. Above their heads and bridging the gap between panels is a shared thought-balloon:

“All right. Let’s see what I think today.”

(* or whatever the view is that allows you to see what’s on screen and the expression on the user’s face at the same time; or just over-the-shoulder with their names written on the back of their sweatshirts — that and the dialogue should sell it)

Icy Truth (b19925) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:07 pm

Hey Dmac….

The verbiage of “Big Island Dave” sounds kinda familiar. Nah….

Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:07 pm

As for Phil, what Phil calls “strategy” the rest of the nation calls dirty tricks.

Only the people who thought they could predict what Obama was going to do, and then discovered he was five steps ahead of them, call them “dirty tricks.”

From what I can tell, his “dirty tricks” generally involve people thinking that they’re controlling him, then suddenly discovering that they’ve been doing what he wanted all along. But he’s only treating them the way they thought they were treating him.

At least that’s what seems to have happened with Chicago politics — various local politicians, in their little spheres of influence, thought they him under their thumb by granting him small favors. Then they are shocked to discover he’s actually better at that game than they are.

Frankly, I far prefer the thought of someone that smart heading our country, rather the incredible predictability of our current administration.

But some people like predictability, and a president who doesn’t come up with any ideas they couldn’t think up on their own.

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:10 pm

Phil, getting a crooked Chicago judge to open up sealed divorce files is dirty tricks in any city but Chicago.

Your praise of Obama is just plain weird, Phil.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:11 pm

My other cartoon idea involves just Phil viewing Obama’s web site and spilling something white and sticky all over his keyboard (and I don’t mean like the puking baby in that commercial), with a word balloon that reads: “YES … I … CAN!!!”

Icy Truth (b19925) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:14 pm

Phil who is looking hungrily at The Daily Kos on his computer screen

Maybe I do get my ideas from what I read, but not like that. My morning webcruise goes like this:

Drudge
Balko
Patterico
McCardle
intheagora.com

That’s 95 percent of my blog reading, aside from click-throughs on those sites.

Maybe it’s true that I could read Kos (which I’ve visited maybe five times, total, ever) and agree with everything that’s written there. But I can just as easily read Patterico and DISAGREE with a large portion of what’s written here — and then have the pleasure of actually thinking about why I disagree.

It gives me more confidence in my ideas to stand by them in the face of constant disagreement. I still could be completely wrong in everything I believe, but at least I’m not swaddling myself in like-minded thinking to protect myself from discovering I’m wrong.

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:19 pm

Icy Truth, please keep your erotic fantasies to yourself.

Phil (6d9f2f) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:20 pm

As has been pointed out, any Trotskyite could have “come up with” the same ideas as Obama. In fact, one of them did . . . his name was Trotsky.

Icy Truth (b19925) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:20 pm

#84 – Phil

“It gives me more confidence in my ideas to stand by them in the face of constant disagreement.”

— I used to do the same thing at The News Hole (the blog for Keith Olbermann’s “Countdown” show), that is until they clamped down against any dissent whatsoever so completely that even most of the blog’s regular progressive contributors jumped ship.

Icy Truth (b19925) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:26 pm

As if Urkel the Chitown Turd is not a product of the Daley machine, bought and paid for with concessions down the road. Yes, union leadership really needs that no secret ballot and no federal oversight of their activities. Obambi thinks that is all just swell. How long before Rezno gets a pardon if Obamalamadingdong gets in office? How about throwing in the wonderful Mumia as a favor to Hollyweird?

The old Daley managed to get out the corpse vote for JFK. How many tainted votes will this Daley procure for Obama? Take away the margins in Cook county and how much difference was there in vote totals for Hussein vs. her Thighness?

Name one of Obama’s associates who is not a far left asshat, whether politically correct, a fixer, an insane racist minister or terrorists who laugh about getting away with murder long ago.

madmax333 (2ef975) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:26 pm

“Then they are shocked to discover he’s actually better at that game than they are.”

I think you’re confusing cleverness and the ability to game the system here with extreme intelligence, Phil. If you had ever lived here in Chi – town, you’d know that past politicos who’ve been similarly lionized along your exact same sentiments are “Fast Eddie” Vrdolyak (imprisoned Alderman), former Mayor Jane Byrne (thrown out of office after only one term, due to corruption convictions of former staff), presently imprisoned former Governor Ryan (part of the GOP, btw), and the present Mayor of Chicago, “Little Big Man” Mayor Daley (Jr.). Da Mayor’s also being currently investigated by Patrick Fitzgerald for corruption, along with Obama’s other big supporter, “Helmet Hair” Governor Blagojevich.

The net is tightening on all of these folks, and with Rezko’s conviction it may yet bear fruit before the election. The Lefties who cheered Fitz’s successful prosection of Libby may be very sorry they’ll get what they wished for – the law of unintended consequences is in full view at present.

Dmac (416471) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:42 pm

#84
but at least I’m not swaddling myself in like-minded thinking to protect myself from discovering I’m wrong
I like that Phil. My thoughts exactlty. There is a strong like-minded republican kin-spirit on this blog. I like the fact that the more I read and exchange views here, I am more able to grasp the other side of every issue. I must say that has helped me greatly in relating with people of opposing political views. I have learnt a lot too.

love2008 (0c8c2c) — 7/14/2008 @ 3:52 pm

BigIslandDave is right that The Economist called George W. Bush the “Accidental President” after the 2000 election. It also labeled ‘accidental’ Gerald Ford, the President of Brazil, Tony Blair, Mike Huckabee, and the Constitution of the European Union.

Like BigIslandDave, The Economist could use some new rhetoric.

DRJ (ec597e) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:01 pm

Phil also is ignoring the present Alderman (Alderwoman?) of Obama’s home district’s take on Obama’s ethics and morality – when asked in the article, she demurs, saying she “doesn’t want to handle that one.” Quite an endorsement, sounds an awful lot like Slick Willy’s former political partners in AS when they were asked the same question during his first run for the WH. Perhaps that’s another sign of his extreme intelligence, or another take is that he’s kind of slimy.

Dmac (416471) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:03 pm

I’m probably not the first guy to say this, but that depiction of Michelle Obama with an AK and a ‘fro kinda turned me on.

Black Panther chicks are hot.

Leviticus (96a507) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:09 pm

Phil and love2008,

I don’t see how we’re ‘swaddling ourselves in like-minded thinking‘ when one of the focuses of this blog is to read and analyze the LA Times, a not-very-conservative newspaper. Here in West Texas, I don’t know many people who regularly read the LA Times but most conservatives I know read national newspapers like the NY Times and watch channels like CNN or MSNBC. How could we not be aware of the liberal point of view?

Kudos to you for talking to people who have views that are different from your own, but how many liberals do you know that are familiar with the views espoused here (let alone are willing to engage them the way you do)?

DRJ (ec597e) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:13 pm

You would have loved the ’60’s, Leviticus.

DRJ (ec597e) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:14 pm

Oh, I do love the ’60s. Whatever pop culture tells me about the ’60s, anyway.

Leviticus (96a507) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:16 pm

BID is a meme-spitting machine. I think imperialist and racist were the only talking points he skipped over, so I will help him out and denounce all of you.
Racists
Sexists
Homophobes
Jingoistic xenophobes too

JD, most certainly not a J.D., MD, DC, PhD, or other initials. (5f0e11) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:17 pm

NTTAWWT, having little thingies after your name. I swear, it does not make you come across as an overbearing arrogant pretentious gasbag. Yes, I am talking about you, David Petranos Esp.

JD, most certainly not a J.D., MD, DC, PhD, or other initials. (5f0e11) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:20 pm

Maybe someday it will be JD, Sr.

DRJ (ec597e) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:21 pm

The selective-responder wrote: There is a strong like-minded republican kin-spirit on this blog

— Who’s a Republican?

Icy Truth (b19925) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:30 pm

#94
DRJ,
Do you believe there is a liberal in every conservative and a conservative in every liberal. Does that make that person a moderate or a rockefeller republican?

love2008 (0c8c2c) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:39 pm

Maybe someday it will be JD, Sr.

Comment by DRJ — 7/14/2008 @ 4:21 pm

🙂 Good one!

I swear, it does not make you come across as an overbearing arrogant pretentious gasbag. Yes, I am talking about you, David Petranos Esp.

Heh.

no one you know (1ebbb1) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:39 pm

love2008,

I think we’re a mixture of beliefs that make it hard to label anyone as completely conservative, liberal or libertarian. For instance, I’m a conservative on foreign policy and domestic social policy but I’m libertarian on economic policy. However, if I have to assign labels, I think the old saying is true that most people tend to move from liberal to conservative as they age.

DRJ (ec597e) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:45 pm

#100
Anyone with a strong passion for this administration’s policies, especially Iraq and freaks out and calls names once someone shows up with a dissenting view point. Thats a republican.

love2008 (0c8c2c) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:48 pm

If I am ever a Sr. there is a Jr running around that I have never been made aware of, or me and Better Half had an accident. Having 3 women in my abode is plenty. No way would I risk a 4th, even for a shot at JD Jr.

JD, comfortable in his sexuality (5f0e11) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:52 pm

lovie – I think your very narrow definition of Republican only exists when someone from the other end of the political spectrum starts trotting out discredited memes, outright lies, canards, and other such talking points.

JD, most certainly not a Sr. (5f0e11) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:55 pm

“However, if I have to assign labels, I think the old saying is true that most people tend to move from liberal to conservative as they age.”

Other common expressions of this dynamic:

“A Liberal mugged by reality.”

“A Liberal after accumulating assets.”

“A Liberal after starting a family.”

“A Liberal after voting for Carter.”

And so yawn.

Dmac (416471) — 7/14/2008 @ 4:58 pm

I love this comment about Obama – in a list of reasons why he thinks McCain will continue to close the gap – by Victor Davis Hanson:

“Obama has a poor grasp of history, geography, American culture, and common sense — whether the number or location of states in the Union, basic facts about WWII or where Arabic is spoken, or his sociological take on Pennsylvania, etc. His advisors realize this, and are playing 4th-quarter defense by keeping him out of ex tempore, non tele-prompted hope and change venues, where his shallowness can manifest itself in astonishing ways.“

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:00 pm

love2008 #104, you continue to embarrass yourself.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:00 pm

VDH sure can write a sentence.

Just JD (5f0e11) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:06 pm

“Established legal precedent” Hmm. Jim Crow was established legal precedent at one time, as was the Dred Scott decision. Both decisions came about because the court was ignoring strict construction and doing something popular (Taney because the 2nd Amendment gave citizens the right to weapons to protect themselves and if blacks could be citizens they could be armed, and the acceptance of Jim Crow because racism was very popular in the “Progressive Era.”)

John Costello (b94289) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:06 pm

Also on The Corner, Derbyshire had a good turn of phrase:

“His instinctive liberalism aside, Wonder Boy doesn’t strike me as any more vain, stupid, or dishonest than your average politician. He does, though, strike me as awfully lightweight — the lightest-weight of any major Presidential contender I can recall. We have interns round the office with deeper life experience than Obama. Heck, I’ve had goldfish with deeper life experience than Obama. JFK at least had a boat sunk under him.”

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:09 pm

Sigh! This “stolen elections” thing is getting old, but, once again, I shall endeavor to explain. In my thirty years as a devout Democrat, I was, for a time, precinct chairman. The chairman of the majority party is usually offered the post of election judge, and then engages at least one clerk of the other major party, or parties, if a third party is really that well represented. (Not merely that vocal.) We worked with punch card ballots for twenty years, so, when the news started coming out, via NPR, (who else?)my wife and I were perplexed. Gradually, we realized that something big and nasty was going on. The recounts were all being conducted in majority Democrat counties. That meant that, for example, the people allegedly turning away Black voters were most likely Democrats. This is very unusual, to say the least. (Also, just how was a recount going to determine the intent of a voter who had been turned away?) The thing that we knew best, of course, was that the punch card ballots are easy to punch. The weight of a dried up little old lady’s hand is more than sufficient to put the stylus all the way through the card. The “machine”is really just a plastic board, with funnel shaped holes, that direct the stylus down into the right spot. The card is like one of those old fashioned computer punch cards, but Candidate A is not slot one on the card, and Candidate B slot two. The correct holes on the cards are spaced out, so the there is no possibility that anyone could punch the wrong one. And the card itself is held very firmly in place, by pegs at the top of the machine. There was some talk that a vote for Gore was punched for Buchanan, but they used the same cards in Republican counties, without similar difficulties. It is true that the Secretary of State, who had to certify the results, was a Republican, but she did not certify any results different from those reported to her by the Democrat county officials. It is also true that there were US Supreme Court rulings in the matter, but the key one was simply that recounts could continue, but could not be limited to only those four Democrat-held counties. Lawyers have a saying, “When the facts are with you, argue the facts. When the facts are against you, argue law.” Every single lawyer for the Democrats who has written a book on the subject, and they are legion, has argued something about “determining voter intent” as the guiding legal principle. However, in fact, there was no difficulty in determining voter intent. Mainly, the press tossed around a great deal of noise, whose evident intent was simply to confuse the public. I still hear various crazy allegations as people have tried to make sense of the nonsensical, while keeping to their cherished notion that the Republicans somehow cheated Crazy Al Gore out of his rightful victory. For me, the realization was a shocking disillusionment, but, I’ve gotten over it. I have, to coin a phrase, “Moved On.”

Michael Adams (ccec86) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:15 pm

#100
Anyone with a strong passion for this administration’s policies, especially Iraq and freaks out and calls names once someone shows up with a dissenting view point. Thats a republican.

Comment by love2008 — 7/14/2008 @ 4:48 pm

Well, after all, “love2008 is a good thinker and debater.

nk (8eafa0) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:22 pm

NK,

I think she is but (like all of us) not on every topic.

JD,

I’m with you. I love kids but after ours were born I realized it’s better to only have as many kids as I have hands.

DRJ (ec597e) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:28 pm

Well, I’ve gotta go.

Patterico, the more the words, the less the meaning. Thank you.

nk (8eafa0) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:33 pm

DRJ – Going from 2 to 3 children would require me to switch from man-to-man to zone defense. Being a Big 10 guy, we don’t play zone.

Just JD (5f0e11) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:39 pm

Phil wrote: From what I can tell, his “dirty tricks” generally involve people thinking that they’re controlling him, then suddenly discovering that they’ve been doing what he wanted all along. But he’s only treating them the way they thought they were treating him.

At least that’s what seems to have happened with Chicago politics — various local politicians, in their little spheres of influence, thought they him under their thumb by granting him small favors. Then they are shocked to discover he’s actually better at that game than they are.

Frankly, I far prefer the thought of someone that smart heading our country, rather the incredible predictability of our current administration.

::::(Shakes head, sighs deeply)::::

Look, I’m fresh out of ways to say you Obamaniacs you’re delusional. I will leave you with this: If you really believe that Obama truly is this Bobby Fischer using real people, and he had an “R” next to his name instead of a “D,” you would not adore him so — you would fear him as the second coming of Machiavelli.

Personally, I don’t think he’s displayed the intelligence to be the leader you believe he can be. I believe if he takes the oath next January, the world is in for a crash course in the Peter Principle.

L.N. Smithee (a0b21b) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:42 pm

Why is everyone losing their wits over my post? Someone asked a stupid question, so he gets the answer he deserves.
And SPQR, #109, suck it up, will you. You are becoming very boring.

love2008 (1b037c) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:42 pm

Love, love, love . . . I serve up a softball, half-hoping that you’d realize I was referring to myself as a registered-independent conservative and therefore would refrain from lumping us all together; and, half-thinking that you’d do exactly what you did — take the “bait” and throw out a narrow stereotyped description, your opinion of what Republicans are like. Oh well.

Icy Truth (b19925) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:47 pm

Kind of interesting, how your comments don’t wear well, isn’t it, love2008?

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:49 pm

Michael Adams wrote:

It is true that the Secretary of State, who had to certify the results, was a Republican, but she did not certify any results different from those reported to her by the Democrat county officials.

Listening in my car as I heard Katherine Harris hold her press conference saying she would verify the results on time was a moment in my life only paralleled by watching my favorite teams comeback in the final seconds.

…For me, the realization was a shocking disillusionment, but, I’ve gotten over it. I have, to coin a phrase, “Moved On.”

Good for you, Mr. Adams. Congrats on not being like Kevin Spacey and the crybabies that made that ridiculous HBO TV-movie flop, Recount.

BTW – Don’t be shocked if Laura Dern garners a Best Supporting Actress nomination for her over-the-top, cartoonish, and insulting portrayal of Harris in that movie. Mark my words.

L.N. Smithee (a0b21b) — 7/14/2008 @ 5:51 pm

Okay Icy. Thats what this threads turn us into, suspicious of even the most decent of intentions. My greater worry is how this whole partisan nonsense is helping to further divide this great country that I love. When you hear members of each party talk about the opposing party, you would think they were talking about one devil in the middle east. The polarisation is becoming quite alarming. America is one nation, people!

love2008 (1b037c) — 7/14/2008 @ 6:01 pm

LN – No doubt about that. Giving that to Dern is as predictable as Michael “I eat twinkies by the pallet” Moore winning the award for mockumentaries.

Just JD (5f0e11) — 7/14/2008 @ 6:03 pm

#121
Whats your size SPQR? That way I can tailor my next comments to fit you just right.

love2008 (1b037c) — 7/14/2008 @ 6:10 pm

My shoe size is 11 Wide

You know what they say about big feet …

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/14/2008 @ 6:13 pm

#126
What do they say about big feet? I hope it’s not something stupid.

love2008 (1b037c) — 7/14/2008 @ 6:19 pm

love2008,

Just because we’re one nation doesn’t mean we all have to agree. But if it does, then why don’t you agree with us?

DRJ (ec597e) — 7/14/2008 @ 6:24 pm

#128
For the sake of unity, I now do DRJ. Except of course in the areas we disagree. 🙂

love2008 (1b037c) — 7/14/2008 @ 6:40 pm

Far upthread:
“Eating scrambled egg whites is a healthy way to do that.”

Quitting smoking is healthy as well.

Chris (b6ebef) — 7/14/2008 @ 6:48 pm

Here a link to Ann Althouse who reminds us of the old Seinfeld episode where no one can figure out the New Yorker cartoons… or if they are funny
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2008/07/wit-and-humor-of-barack-obama.html

Obama’s statements on “mesoptamia” lead me to think his campaign got their geography off the the map behind Jon Stewart

SteveG (71dc6f) — 7/14/2008 @ 7:43 pm

#123 – love2008

“Thats what this threads turn us into, suspicious of even the most decent of intentions.”

— “Strange is your language and I have no decoder
Why don’t you make your intentions clear” — Peter Gabriel

“My greater worry is how this whole partisan nonsense is helping to further divide this great country that I love.”

— The divide may well be getting wider; however, it has existed for a long time. In fact, in one form or another it has existed since the birth of our nation.

“When you hear members of each party talk about the opposing party, you would think they were talking about one devil in the middle east.”

— Some of the rhetoric (on both sides) has been over the top; whether it has become nastier during recent years, or just more widely disseminated due to the Internet, is something to be explored and debated.

“The polarisation is becoming quite alarming. America is one nation, people!”

— E pluribus unum . . . out of many, one.
Out of many people, many classes, many income levels, many philosophies, many beliefs . . . divergent, divisive, different . . . one nation. A nation founded on the freedom to believe what you want to believe and say what you want to say. This freedom is our common thread; the belief in preserving that freedom — within the framework of our Constitution — is (or should be) our common belief. The laws we enact, the programs we run, the tactics and methods we use to achieve that preservation … how we go about the day-to-day operation of our republic; these are the areas where the left/right debate reigns and is ultimately a healthy thing, as long as the business of the people gets done.

BTW, the comment by DRJ, “Just because we’re one nation doesn’t mean we all have to agree. But if it does, then why don’t you agree with us?” makes a good point: people, such as the junior Senator from Illinois, who call for uniting the partisans are really saying, “Why don’t you all just come over to my side?”

Icy Truth (b19925) — 7/14/2008 @ 10:46 pm

I think history, on balance, will be very, very kind to George W. Bush.

Aha…aha ha ha ha ha ha…

Some of the comments here are so stupid I want to stab myself in the face.

How high are you right wing morons?

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:17 pm

You know what they say about big feet …

That you’re a clown?

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/14/2008 @ 11:18 pm

#133 and 134, indeed, a prick is posting these comments…

Have you anything substansive to say at all? GWB may not be the best POTUS ever, but he is still President, and I think he’s doing an alright job, even if he’s truly messed up in some areas (immigration, anyone?).

Gregory (f7735e) — 7/15/2008 @ 12:23 am

The whole thing like a few other recent spurs to outrage is IMO a stalking horse,
Fills up the headline with pap so there is no coverage on the issues where Obama is REALLY vulnerable, like his connection to subsidised building corruption in his Old Illinois Senate District,

The Boston Globe had a series of articles but other than that there has been silence on that example of Cook County take the money and run politics at its finest

Dan Kauffman (b31cae) — 7/15/2008 @ 4:49 am

When you hear members of each party talk about the opposing party, you would think they were talking about one devil in the middle east. The polarisation is becoming quite alarming. America is one nation, people!

Comment by love2008 — 7/14/2008 @ 6:01 pm

There is nothing new about political polarization and nothing in recent times rises to the level of

Ma, Ma, Where’s my Pa 😉

Dan Kauffman (b31cae) — 7/15/2008 @ 4:52 am

“Is this not a tired, old, and ineffective trick? Making stupid sketches of Obama and trying to cast him as a muslim does not make him a one. Oh I forgot, it’s a parody. But we get the message and it aint funny!”

This is a liberal magazine so I can only assume they posted the cover thinking Hillary was still in the picture.

davod (5bdbd3) — 7/15/2008 @ 5:23 am

“Some of the comments here are so stupid I want to stab myself in the face.”

So what’s keeping you? Please post us the pictures after the puncturing and perforations are complete.

Dmac (416471) — 7/15/2008 @ 8:01 am

Is the New Yorker cover available on its own web site? I found the article, but I haven’t found the cover.

Ira (28a423) — 7/15/2008 @ 8:56 am

Never mind. Found it by clicking on the Table of Contents button.

Ira (28a423) — 7/15/2008 @ 8:56 am

Response to Comment #81. Sen. Obama has a record here in IL that is remarkably free of achievement. But to suggest that he has somehow transcended the Chicago politicans that run the city county and state is nonsense. When told to do so, Obama supported Todd Stroger (a truly incompetent manager), to take his Dad’s seat as Chair of the County Board without a wimper.

If anyone for one minute thinks that Obama would stick his finger in the face of Richie Daley and tell him that corruption must end and Daley must do this blah blah blah – has absolutely no concept of who has what power in this state and the level of influence Obama had here, even as a US Senator.

Why do you think he has stayed as far away from the Blagojevich – Madigan battle in Springfield? Because he well knows that if he did weigh in and opine about what should be done with the State Budget stalemate, Jesse Jackson’s off mike wish would likely come true.

Sen. Obama may well be the next President – but for now, he is not yet a seal but he has grown a good size pair of flippers.

mark olson (440cc0) — 7/15/2008 @ 11:07 am

No One you know:

I think history, on balance, will be very, very kind to George W. Bush.

Me:

Aha..ha..ha

Gregory:

Have you anything substansive to say at all? GWB may not be the best POTUS ever, but he is still President, and I think he’s doing an alright job, even if he’s truly messed up in some areas (immigration, anyone?).

Truthy assertions such as the one at the top of this comment are not worthy of a substantive reply. Not anymore. Not even anywhere going back to May 2003 when the mission was proclaimed as accomplished. And at this point are simply laughably delusional. There’s no other way to react to it anymore, cos it’s not even an opinion anymore, but some sort of pathology, which doesn’t require debate, but perhaps some sort of psychological intervention. But I’ll briefly humor the contention that history will be kind to George W. Bush.

It really comes down to this IMHO. History rewards leaders and Presidents who rise up to a challenge and deal with it effectively. Bush had the golden opportunity to be one of the great Presidents of this Republic. He really did. After 911 the man had the whole nation behind him. His approaval ratings were through the roof. This nation was united in what was deemed “the WAR on TERROR”. I know right-wingers don’t want to hear this, because you’d like to think that the left has been a drag on the man from day one (Sept. 12 2001)> But you know that’s not true. Left, right and center were as joined together after that fateful day as at any time in the history of the nation even including Dec. 7 1941. And it simply became one failure and excuse for failure and spin job and blantant lie and excuse after another (six more months…six more months…six more months). I’m not even going to go through the endless litany of crap foisted on the American people even to this day as it’s simply too depressing. And I know the right likes to mention Saddam’s capture and execution as a victory and the surge, but Saddam wasn’t responsible for 911 and had no connection to AQ and the surge if it’s working should mean we should get get the troops ready to hand off the situation to the Iraqi’s, which is what the sovereign democratically elected government of Iraq wants. Yet we still cannot leave or begin to make plans to leave because honestly the country is a shit storm waiting to continue and Afghanistan is gearing up to be a mess as well because that was never handled properly due to the Iraq war. The real winner in all this has been Iran, who’s come out as the clear dominant force in the Mid. East. Which actually wouldn’t have been so bad if the burgeoning democratic institutions there had been allowed to keep growing/maturing.

Bottom line: When all is said and done, history will not be kind to GWB. At all. They can try and pin it on Rumsfeld (a joke of a Sec. of Defense) or the Democratic win of 2006 (as spineless as they Dems have been at times), but we know who owns this geopolitical, military and diplomatic catastrophe. And besides all the glaring incompetence that is of public record, I’ll tell you why else history will not be kind to GWB: Because. I and millions like me who’ve lived through it first hand will never stop writing and repeating the revulsion of living through the Bush years and the mistakes that were made and the criminal regressions of the ideals and founding principles that are supposed to be what make this country great. Again, I won’t go through the whole litany, because we all know how far the country has strayed from them. Getting attacked and losing 3000 Americans does not justify pissing on the Constitution, suspending Habeas Corpus (spare me the crap about Guantanamo not being “America”, and the prisoners not being American’s. We all know what the spirit of the law in that area is) , turning our backs on international laws regarding torture and making the executive branch into a de facto proto-monarchy unaccountable to the Congress or the American people.

About the only positive thing about the Bush era is that it has effectively ended the 40 year cycle of Goldwater Republicanism fueled by the fear of …well…just about everything they could think of. Hell, maybe it was even a necessary and positive step in the evolution of the country. But GWB?

Fuggettaboutit. Worst of the worst.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 12:14 pm

Peter, your recitation of long debunked myths is hilarious. Not to mention your demonstration of your ignorance of history.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/15/2008 @ 12:21 pm

143- you and the utterly fecal-mouthed Levi should compare talking points. You claim Bush micturated on the constitution and Levi asserts Bush defecated and then uses our constitution as toilet paper. But you turds never actually come up with actual facts about W’s disregard for our laws. It is all just your constant litany of BS and whining about the evil/stupid chimp boy Dubya.
We never actually see any sane alternatives to various policies- just lip service to the various grievance groups that might be affected. Because it is all about special interest 24/7 with libs. Where is that energy policy pelosi and reid promised back in ’06? Where are Lurch’s service records he promised the now dearly departed Russert several years ago? Where are those articles of impeachment against Bush/Cheney my asshat rep. Wexler, along with space cadet Kuchinich, promised me years ago? Why does Urkel feel the need to scrub his website of views expressed against the surge and Gen .Patraeus?
How has this incompetent administration managed to continue to cover up the vast government and Joo conspiracy that brought us 9/11? Why won’t your demi-God Gore deign to debate his religion of global warming (and who IS actually the controlling legal authority)?
Kindly enlighten us a little about these and other burning questions. Oh, and do you agree with your twin hate-america firster, the always slimeball Levi, that those dimbulbs serving in the military are only good as “cumrags”?

madmax333 (e17a7a) — 7/15/2008 @ 12:55 pm

Madmax333: How many signing statements has the golden-boy utilized?

How many times has he claimed executive privilege in regards to Bolton, Miers and Rove?

How many White House emails were lost in correspondence to the RNC or for RNC business?

How many articles of the Geneva convention has the Administration poo pooed away?

How many Attorney General’s were fired for not going after Democrats running for office?

How many have written books and are going to write books?

How many Richard Clarke statements on the malfeasance and incompetence of the Bush WH in the run up to 911 do you need?

How many Scott McClellan’s have to write tell all books. And how many more will come to prove the worst about what was suspected of the admin all along?

How many CIA agents were outed for sheer political retribution?

How many words were completely unsubstantiated, by the CIA, yet uttered by all the members of the Bush inner circle like a mantra on the run up to the Iraq war?

How many WMDs were found in Iraq (and I mean true WMDs capable of thousands of deaths and composed of Bio, Chem or Nuclear components?)

I could go on here, but it’s like shooting fish out of the proverbial barrel of excrement. The Bush administration is a scatological wet dream.

You think the American public hates W. now? You have no idea what’s coming after that house of cards comes apart once he’s out of office and all the Scotty McClellan’s do all they can to distance themselves from him. History…history..history…

Only way he’s not going to be reviled for the next 100 years is if the GOP somehow pulls off a coup and makes it illegal to write the truth about him.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 1:41 pm

But hell…considering the fact that they don’t even want him to appear with McCain at their convention, sounds to me like their even trying to forget they ever even knew the guy. What loyalty…

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 1:57 pm

Live in your fantasy world and continue with the BDS. I already heard it will continue in any Urkel administration with calls for a criminal trial in the European courts. We already know that you hate your own country and want her enemies to flourish. Try new new canards and talking points/spin. Eat some more Brown29 and perhaps you’ll wake up. All the camel dung your ilk spews here has been analyzed and rejected repeatedly. And who really gives a rat’s ass about Joe Wilson and his non-secret agent at the time spouse. The baitch handpicked her treasonous, publicity seeking hubby for the trip to Niger. Some expert whom a congressional committee already determined to be a blad-faced liar.
So what do you think of Urkel purging his site of surge related comments? What do you think of Levi’s assertion that the military are cumrags?
Yes, I know the left is deranged with hatred since stupid Bush stole two elections from them. Oh horrors and yet his favorable ratings are positively soaring in comparison to your do-nothing dem congress.

madmax333 (e17a7a) — 7/15/2008 @ 1:58 pm

That is some serious BDS there, Peter. Lithium might help.

Just JD (5f0e11) — 7/15/2008 @ 2:18 pm

Peter, more myths on your part. Richard Clarke is an amusing cite by you, given how he was discredited by the differences between his stories in his books and his testimony to the 911 commission.

CIA agents outed? None, by the Bush White House, Plame was outed by a protege of Colin Powell. More CIA agents have been outed by the New York Times.

How many words “unsubstantiated” by the CIA yet uttered by the Bush administration? None, according to the congressional intelligence committee reports, which concluded that the statements by the administration were supported by available intelligence.

WMD components found capable of causing large numbers of deaths? Tons of chemicals, see the Duelfer report.

Worse president? Shredding the Constitution? Woodrow Wilson put people in prison for opposing WWI. FDR conducted combat operations without congressional authorization and had over one hundred thousand people rounded up by race and put in camps. Hundreds of people are picked up and put in the most humane prisoner camp in history in Guantanamo Bay and Bush is the worst? You really are just the most ridiculous liar.

You can go on? Indeed, you do go on. As earlier, with nothing but myths.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/15/2008 @ 2:20 pm

Did I miss something?

Is Bush running again? I thought the Constitution prohibited it.

Why is that fuckstick Peter perseverating about Bush on a thread about Obama and spewing discredited lies while he’s at it?

People like his ilk and Levi, and the people reacting negatively to the New Yorker cover, once again go a long way toward proving the point that liberals have no freaking senses of humor.

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/15/2008 @ 2:21 pm

I hope Peter doesn’t use all caps. It’s scary when the deranged ones use all caps.

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/15/2008 @ 2:23 pm

I’m continually astonished that people like Peter think that after all these years, they can still just outright lie about the past 5 or 6 years.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/15/2008 @ 2:38 pm

This just in: Commander Bunnypants’ approval rating reaches a new low of 28 percent …

Are the members of this website among that dwindling number? I’ve met scores of Republicans who say this pitiful little man has been a disaster both for the country AND the GOP.

Saw a cool bumper sticker:

January 2009: End of an error.

Ciao …

ProudLiberal (ac8aad) — 7/15/2008 @ 2:46 pm

The cover is brilliant. It mocks the stupidity of the right attacking Barack Obama for things that are not relevant. Oh my god, Obama is not wearing a lapel flag pin!! Stop the presses! Fox News Alert. The right wing blogs and news channels miss the point about 75% of the time. Maybe that just showbusiness.

Obama must be defeated because he is the most fiscally liberal candidate ever. Frankly, I don’t think Obama will be nearly as retarded on Iraq as he promises to be. What he WILL carry through on is his party’s passion for crushing small businesses by severely taxing every entity making over $200k per year. Listen to the tone – China, India, Russia and Dubai deserve their chance to be world leaders. We’ve had our turn, now we must pay up. Taxes are the equalizer. That’s Obama’s message.

Wesson (f6c982) — 7/15/2008 @ 8:42 pm

People like his ilk and Levi, and the people reacting negatively to the New Yorker cover, once again go a long way toward proving the point that liberals have no freaking senses of humor.

If you’d read my comments concerning the cover up thread you would know I think the New Yorker cover is brilliant and hilarious. Wingnuts can’t make out, it doesn’t have much to do with the Obama’s, but rather with their own desperate bone-headedness. It’s a beautiful thing.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 8:46 pm

Is Bush running again?

Yes. As John McCain.

Look, I can understand the bitterness and frustration. If I’d voted for Bush twice, I’d be bitter and frustrated also. But I didn’t because I could see what an utter incompetent twat he would be. Why didn’t you guys? So why do you think you have a shred of credibility when it comes to criticizing Obama and supporting McCain? You don’t.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 8:52 pm

Peter: In humor there’s truth ?

Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 7/15/2008 @ 8:54 pm

In humor there’s truth ?

Absolutely. But are they laughing with the Wingnuts and Dittoheads or at the Wingnuts and Dittoheads?

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:02 pm

157 Poof Liberal,

There’s NOTHING FUNNIER than your messiah-commander using the Presidential seal as a damned campaign prop. To leave that off the NY’r cover was a true crime against humanity. A comedy faux pas. A sin worthy of dog collars and corporal punishment.

You get my drift.

Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:06 pm

“If you’d read my comments concerning the cover up thread you would know I think the New Yorker cover is brilliant and hilarious.”

Peter – That makes a lot of sense. Why then, is the left so upset about it?

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:06 pm

I can’t wait to get my New Yorler cover T-shirt, the one Chris Matthews is so worried that people are going to make.

Peter, the right is laughing at the left’s contortions over this self inflicted wound. You guys can’t get out of your own way.

How’s the energy policy coming?

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:08 pm

In humor there’s truth ?

Absolutely.

Then look at the visuals cues on that cover.

Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:09 pm

That makes a lot of sense. Why then, is the left so upset about it?

Far as I know the left isn’t too upset about it. If you have examples post some links. It wouldn’t surprise me too much. There are just as many people with no sense of humor on the left as on the right.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:20 pm

As someone else said, America-loathing Michelle Obamalamadingdong looks like Angela Davis. They should have made the junk in her trunk way more substantial so her hips are realistic looking. The emperor is as phony as they come and he doesn’t wear clothes.
Amazing how dems pick one puke candidate after another. “You never had it so good.” “Oh, goodie, goodie, goodie!” “I lusted in my heart”. “I voted for funding the war before I voted against it.” Sad fact is that Americans vote these clowns into office on occasion. Even sadder is that Obama makes Hillary look positively stateswoman-like, a regular Maggie Thatcher.

madmax333 (b8239e) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:23 pm

#84

This is a psychotic loon you describe as running for president.

From what I can tell, his “dirty tricks” generally involve people thinking that they’re controlling him, then suddenly discovering that they’ve been doing what he wanted all along. But he’s only treating them the way they thought they were treating him.

Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:24 pm

There’s NOTHING FUNNIER than your messiah-commander using the Presidential seal as a damned campaign prop.

No, actually there is: It’s George W. Bush using the Presidential seal as the 43rd President of the United States of America. It’s endlessly hilarious. Tragic too. (But you know what they say about comedy and tragedy…)

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:27 pm

Peter,
You’re basically confirming that Barack Hussein Obama has no business running for office. Every vote will simply be an anti-Bush vote. May His Blackness carry on without the aid of his tele-tele le le rrrrr rrr. Shite. November just ate Obama’s speech.

You will never see this man far from a wall socket.

Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:39 pm

You will never see this man far from a wall socket.

Damn, There should’ve been a teleprompter in that cover also. You’re right. Because the ludicrous suggestion that Obama can’t speak w/o one makes about as much sense as the ignorance that he’s a closet Islamoterrorist.

That first debate, town hall event with McCain is going to be unbelieveably entertaining. On one side one of the most gift orators of his generation and on the other Johnny McCain, from the used car salesman school of public appearances.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:48 pm

I’ve heard enough of Obamas unscripted appearances to know that when he starts speaking extemporaneously, he becomes a stuttering, stammering, double-digit IQ commoner. I can’t wait until he has to answer a tough question.

WLS (02df99) — 7/15/2008 @ 9:54 pm

No one says the guy can’t speak. His voice captivates the uneducated and the unarmed.

If you want a cool egghead beatnik to hold down the mic, go down to the coffee house and do your singing there. Don’t call a Socialist a “change for hope.” Biggest pile of manure walking.

Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 7/15/2008 @ 10:02 pm

“Far as I know the left isn’t too upset about it. If you have examples post some links.”

Even funnier yet, Peter.

daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 7/15/2008 @ 10:03 pm

What’s funny is watching the Wingnuts desperately search for the magic bullet that’s going to save them from an Obama presidency because McCain continues to be about as charismatic and interesting as a toaster. And can’t ever seem to get ahead in the polls as Obama keeps opening up a lead.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/15/2008 @ 10:49 pm

Folks, I think that’s enough feeding the troll, don’t you?

I mean, overfeedings are kinda cruel, especially when it’s just a baby troll and not used to solid food yet…

Gregory (f7735e) — 7/15/2008 @ 11:01 pm

What’s funny is watching the Wingnuts desperately search for the magic bullet that’s going to save them from an Obama presidency because McCain continues to be about as charismatic and interesting as a toaster. And can’t ever seem to get ahead in the polls as Obama keeps opening up a lead.

Pete, what’s even funnier is watching idiot troll after idiot troll like yourself troll come over here and spew your tired DNC-sponsored hatespeech.

Honestly, some liberals just absolutely can’t stand it that conservatives assert their right to free speech on their blogs. There’s just no bottom to the abject hatred of the left for anyone who disagrees about anything. Pete (and so many others tonight) prove it in spades.

qdpsteve (cd214a) — 7/15/2008 @ 11:12 pm

Peter wrote: That first debate, town hall event with McCain is going to be unbelieveably entertaining. On one side one of the most gift (sic) orators of his generation and on the other Johnny McCain, from the used car salesman school of public appearances.

Uh huh. Obama’s been ducking appearing at any event with McCain in which there’s a chance he will have to speak extemporaneously. He knows his strength is oratory, and not thinking on his feet.

L.N. Smithee (ef90eb) — 7/16/2008 @ 12:14 am

He did pretty well debating Hillary, over and over and over again so I wouldn’t worry about it. Please carry on with the regularly scheduled ad hominem attacks in this echo chamber you people love so well. I came here to discuss the issues and provide my opinion and it’s sad to see that you guys would rather hold on to your false monolithic cartoonish tired old stereotypes of what liberals are supposed to be about. Tsk, tsk tsk. makes me think you guys can dish it out, but just can’t take it return. Poor form gentlemen. Poor form.

Peter (e70d1c) — 7/16/2008 @ 9:03 am

Peter, amusing that you decry ad hominem attacks … and conduct your own in the next sentence.

But as I pointed out above, your attempt to “discuss the issues” was to just give a list of long-debunked myths.

SPQR (26be8b) — 7/16/2008 @ 9:07 am

Peter, you know Michelle Obama thinks you’re a dumb cracker. She wants your vote.

Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 7/16/2008 @ 4:14 pm

My girlfriend and I want to go on a awesome vacation soon. We were looking for advice. Anyone have any awesome spots? A way to save a little dough would be nice too. Traveling is pricey these days.

SallyHilvbaters (530369) — 10/7/2008 @ 5:57 pm

7/14/2008

Open Obama Thread: The New Yorker Cover and the New York Times Op-Ed

183 Responses to “Open Obama Thread: The New Yorker Cover and the New York Times Op-Ed”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out