Finally: Some change for Obama people to believe in
[Posted by Karl]
The storyline of the past week or two has been the general lack of changeyness visible in Barack Obama’s picks as nominees for his incoming administration. The other day, Allahpundit wrote that “the only ones who got screwed thus far were the far-Left groups that bought into the Hope and Change populism and thought Obama would start a new Golden Age of Progressivism.”
However, a hint of Change surfaced today with word that Samantha Power has crawled out from under Obama’s campaign bus:
A former adviser to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign who once called Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton a “monster” is now working on the transition team for the agency that Clinton may lead.
At the time, I noted that the “monster” comment was likely only part of the reason for the Power outage, with more realistic Kinsleyian gaffes about how quickly US troops could be drawn down in Iraq being another factor. Power stood by those comments and even hinted she could return after the election.
Power seems to be making her comeback, so it is worth reminding everyone that she is a virulently anti-Israel academic who has supported, among other things, imposing and enforcing a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a commitment of US troops.
Now that would be very changey indeed.
– Karl
I do believe Obama will be anti-Israel. And yet, it won’t buy him an inch of peace.
Comment by Patricia (ee5c9d) — 11/28/2008 @ 6:34 pm
US troop commitment…
Don’t we still have troops in the Sinai/Negev overseeing the Egyptian-Israeli settlement of the border there?
Comment by Another Drew (5a0f73) — 11/28/2008 @ 6:43 pm
Noted leftwinger Allahpundit says Obama screwed the left over?
Big surprise.
Still can’t let go of the childish propaganda that cost you guys the election, I see.
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/28/2008 @ 6:45 pm
parsnip can’t find anything inaccurate in my post, I see. As for it costing anyone the election, if parsnip has some links to Obama being aggressively grilled by the MSM about people like Samantha Power, I’d be glad to read them and comment.
Comment by Karl (eacece) — 11/28/2008 @ 6:50 pm
I do believe Obama will be anti-Israel.
One name: Soros, coupled with Obama having been thus far wishy-washy at best re support of Israel.
HuffPo on the Power return,
Clinton’s office declined to comment on Power’s inclusion in the State Department transition, but an official close to the Obama transition team said Power had “made a gesture to bury the hatchet” with Clinton and that it had been well-received.
I would love to have been a fly on the wall when the gesture was made…
Comment by Dana (79a78b) — 11/28/2008 @ 6:53 pm
Karl,
You think Hillary Clinton is no change from Condi Rice?
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:03 pm
Quick refresher on Hillary’s Iraq position and votes perhaps?
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:08 pm
I think Clinton might be a welcome change from Rice, as she’d probably be more conservative. Rice has been a terrible SecState.
I also think it’s very difficult to predict what Obama might do in regard to almost anything, as Obama is only about one thing — Obama. His ego is earthshattering, and he’s willing to do pretty much anything to aggrandize himself.
Looked at through that prism, I do think he’d do whatever he could get away with to be the one to ‘solve’ the Israeli/Palistinian problem. How he might go about that though, could just as well be Pro-Israel as anti.
Comment by Hermit Dave (c8ee2a) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:09 pm
Iraq is over, jack. America got the boot.
Shouldn’t we be pondering her positions on Iran?
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:10 pm
And visions of the reluctant Rabin accepting the handshake as smilin’ Billy looks on come to mind.
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:11 pm
You think Hillary Clinton is no change from Condi Rice?
Rice never made up stories about being shot at.
Comment by Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (b63e53) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:12 pm
parsnip you are so colossally, mindnumbingly, stupid and pointless you might come close to approaching humorous at any moment.
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:12 pm
and you fled the mumbai thread like a sniveling coward with your tail between your legs as the slings and arrows got too tough for you to absorb. Typical drive by needler with nothing of substance to offer. Bite ankles and run.
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:14 pm
Funny jack
Your insightful references to childen’s games are as scary as a 2012 run by Palin.
Boo!
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:17 pm
Why, adjectiveless Dana; what gesture did you expect to see?
The question will become: will the inconvenient friends of our incoming president find that the bus has moved on, or is it still available under which to be thrown? Senator Obama went out of his way to address Jewish concerns during the election, and at least with his post-election statements and most of his personnel picks, he has positioned himself as a sensible, let-the-adults-run-things moderate. My guess is that he remembers what happened to his prospective Secretary of State’s husband when he tried governing from the left during his first two years.
My guess is that he has more sympathy for the Palestinians than some, but the Palestinians have a way of running through sympathy by overplaying their (weak) hand and doing something stupid. If Dr Powers is brought into the administration itself, rather than just the transition team, the adults will isolate her responsibilities from the Israeli theater.
Comment by The somewhat amused and somewhat not amused Dana (556f76) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:18 pm
Iraq is over, jack. America got the boot.
Oh really, Partisnip Hack??
Published today: Iraq clears way for US troops to stay for three more years.
Comment by Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (b63e53) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:20 pm
Ooh you scared me snippy with your references to childen’s [sic] games but also your uncanny ability to fall-back, ala Seinfeld telling an airline peanut joke, and recycle a reference to Palin, showing as usual, not only your lack of substance but also your lack of originality. Your material doesn’t seem to earn you too many gold stars at protein wisdom either where you seem to be treated with the same dismissive disdain for your one-dimensional snark. I think HvyMtl guy basically told you there to shove it where the sun don’t shine, right?
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:24 pm
Paul noted:
Now, isn’t that interesting? That would put a decision point on troops remaining in Iraq near the end of 2011 to the beginning of 2012. Think that the Iraqis just gave our incoming president an election issue?
Comment by The cynical Dana (556f76) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:24 pm
Paul, I’m sure that refutation of defective hack turnip’s meaningless, baseless snark probably took you a long time to find. I mean considering how obscure the news of SOFA was, right?
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:26 pm
Iraq is over, jack. America got the boot.
Shouldn’t we be pondering her positions on Iran?
Comment by parsnip
This is really pretty ignorant. Victor Davis Hanson had a piece yesterday about how the left still hasn’t accepted that it won the election. They can calm down and try to be good citizens or they can continue BDS when Bush isn’t even around anymore. The latter is called psychosis.
Comment by Mike K (394db3) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:26 pm
This just in….
Karnak has just devined that American troops, stationed at joint American-Iraqi bases will still be in Iraq, November, 2012!
Now, if we could just bring home those troops from Germany?
Comment by Another Drew (5a0f73) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:27 pm
Now, if we could just bring home those troops from Germany?
Not just that AD; Bill Clinton promised to have the troops home from Kosovo by Christmas 1997.
Eleven years later, we still have troops there.
Raise a similar objection about that, Partisnip Hack?
Comment by Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (b63e53) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:32 pm
Paul, I’m sure that refutation of defective hack turnip’s meaningless, baseless snark probably took you a long time to find. I mean considering how obscure the news of SOFA was, right?
I worked harder that I ever have to find that story, Jack.
Comment by Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (b63e53) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:33 pm
Comment by Paul (creator of “Staunch Brayer”) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:33 pm
Someone’s channelling the 1993 Bill Clinton!
Comment by Another Drew (5a0f73) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:38 pm
The real question is whether Sen. Clinton is Change We Can Believe In. Our president-elect seemed to think her foreign polcy judgment was off during the primaries, but seems content to have her running the State Dept. now. Maybe that’s too much nuance for parsnip.
But to answer parsiip’s question, I don’t think Rice ever serpentined her way across an airport runway to avoid imaginary gunmen.
Comment by Karl (eacece) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:39 pm
“…but ah cain’t.”
Bottom lip pulled tightly over top lip.
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 7:40 pm
Parsnip:
Your assertions are in dire need of help, both here and the Mumbai thread.
You wouldn’t just abandon them, would you?
Comment by Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (b63e53) — 11/28/2008 @ 8:04 pm
I think it’s more along the lines of the Radical Right claiming Bush wasn’t a conservative, but Obama is, Mike K.
I predict this syndrome will last until Obama’s first day in office.
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/28/2008 @ 8:05 pm
Instead of defending his soundly defeated assertions, Partisnip Hack simply discards them and makes new ones!
I think it’s more along the lines of the Radical Right claiming Bush wasn’t a conservative, but Obama is, Mike K.
Oh please. Name names: who is claiming Obama a conservative?
We’ve merely pointed out that his recycling of Clinton staffers and appointees and adoption of several Bush policies and platforms is curious for someone that ran his entire campaign on “Hope and Change.”
I predict this syndrome will last until Obama’s first day in office.
If this is to mean that we will stop pointing out his actions does not match what he promised his base, no.
Comment by Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (b63e53) — 11/28/2008 @ 8:18 pm
parsnip’s leftist revenge fantasies are kicking in again.
Comment by daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/28/2008 @ 8:25 pm
More like magical thinking from a defeated minority, Paul.
As long as Obama facilitates our withdrawal from Iraq and appoints 3 or 4 Lefty judges to the Supreme Court, nobody on the left will care what else he does.
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/28/2008 @ 8:28 pm
Nope nobody will care. He can prolong the Afghan war through two terms, invade Pockistan, bail on reforming health care, appoint John Bolton as ambassador to the UN, add more provisions to the PATRIOT act…all good and fine. And which four seats on the Court will be opening up within the next 8 years?
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 8:49 pm
Scalia’s plus the three aging liberals’.
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/28/2008 @ 8:56 pm
More like magical thinking from a defeated minority, Paul.
Pointing out facts is magical thinking. I see.
So are you going to name names, give specific examples of anybody claiming Obama a conservative? Or are you abandoning that assertion also?
As long as Obama facilitates our withdrawal from Iraq and appoints 3 or 4 Lefty judges to the Supreme Court, nobody on the left will care what else he does.
Sure about that?
If he wanders off on any liberal core issues other than what you mentioned, the nutroots will become unhinged.
That is their nature.
Comment by Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (b63e53) — 11/28/2008 @ 8:58 pm
Scalia’s
What makes you think his seat will be open?
Comment by Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (b63e53) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:00 pm
When you don’t know sh** from shinola you have to hire someone you think might. If he could remember the 90′s (through the drug haze) he would know the Slick Willie crowd didn’t know sh** from shinola either, but then there’s not a democrat in the country who isn’t anti-american or a coward, you pick which, so he has no choice but to hire retreads.. Just make ‘no changes’ and ‘hope’ no one notices. First time he’s been right so far, the democrats are so far gone from 8 years of BDS they haven’t noticed they bent over when he said bend over.
Comment by Scrapiron (dda662) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:03 pm
Scalia isn’t going anywhere in the next eight years and if the other three liberals were to retire it wouldn’t make any difference what if they just get replaced by their ideological mirrors. So laughing at the hysteria of referring to Obama as a “Marxist” or a “socialist” is just “Radical Right” fantasy, but on the horizon we can see the appointment of “lefty” judges to the Supreme Court, which if true would make Obama what exactly?
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:06 pm
Speaking of anti-semites on the Obama team, has Robert Malley resurfaced? I thought he had but couldn’t recall the circumstances.
Comment by daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:08 pm
You see all you “wingers”? Calling Obama a leftist is just right wing hysteria, but then he’s going to put “lefties” on the bench, and that will satisfy his left wing base regardless of ANYTHING else he does. F’n brilliant.
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:09 pm
Jack – That’s a silly question. It makes him center right to conservative of course.
Comment by daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:10 pm
Ah silly me of course. Just like all of the frothing screamers making Nazi analogies about Bush and Republicans really now just want to get past all of the “partisan division”.
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:14 pm
I think it’s more along the lines of the Radical Right claiming Bush wasn’t a conservative, but Obama is, Mike K.
I predict this syndrome will last until Obama’s first day in office.
Comment by parsnip
This doesn’t even make sense. I know some of you have tried to parse this but I think the 90s drug haze is still in place. Nobody said Obama was anything but a leftist but his chief interest seems to be in himself. Since his Chicago friends could not be exposed in confirmation hearings, he has chosen the Clinton team to staff his administration. They are marginally competent but better than his own people. Remember the Clinton foreign policy team brought us a series of islamist attacks culminating in 9/11 after they refused to take action.
I wonder if, once Hillary is sworn in at State and her political career is essentially over, the moguls at ABC will release “Path to 9/11.” I’d like to see it again.
Comment by Mike K (6c3bc7) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:46 pm
Karl, or DRJ, or Patterico – Can any of you confirm the multiple identities that parsnip/alphie/sniffles has posted under?
Comment by JD (5f0e11) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:50 pm
Say, does anyone recall what happened to all those on the Left screaming how BushRoveCheney were going to cancel the elections, disband Congress, and rule by decree?
They absolutely knew that Bush was going to tear-up the Constitution, and yet….?
Comment by Another Drew (5a0f73) — 11/28/2008 @ 9:55 pm
Of course, AD. That’s why their Rodney King channeling (“Can’t we all just get along?”) over “partisan division” deserves such mocking.
Comment by Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (b63e53) — 11/28/2008 @ 10:16 pm
Chimpy McHitlerburton shredded the Constitution. It is up to Teh One to restore our founding principles.
Comment by JD (5f0e11) — 11/28/2008 @ 10:18 pm
heh. You say that as if Obama has any clue what this country was founded on…
Comment by Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 11/28/2008 @ 10:31 pm
I’m sure Obama is aware America was founded on slavery, Scott.
Certain regions try hard to make us all forget that little fact.
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/28/2008 @ 10:32 pm
You say that as if Obama has any clue what this country was founded on…
In the faculty club at the University of Chicago — away from the Milton Friedman table of course — they boil down the founding principles to the following:
1. Multiculturalism
2. Rule of the academic elite
3. Tax increases on everyone making more than the highest paid professor in the School of Humanities
Comment by JVW (bff0a4) — 11/28/2008 @ 10:38 pm
Plus, we know Obama feels the Constitution is a flawed document, so he’s got that going for him, which is nice.
Comment by daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/28/2008 @ 10:42 pm
and I’m sure the little turnip asks forgiveness from every descendant of slaves he’s meets everyday, pays reparations, and forgoes every benefit that he reaps from living in a society with such cruel antecedents.
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 10:43 pm
Yes, the geographical generalization known as a “region” is constantly denying our nation’s history. So true. What more clear statement of fact can one pronounce.
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/28/2008 @ 10:45 pm
I saw some great holiday gift ideas today almost guaranteed to annoy my humorless liberal neighbors. Lawn jockeys with Obama heads and some preprinted signs to hold from their hands like “Tax” and “Spend”, plus blank signs to make your own. Those could really spread some holiday cheer!
I predenounce myself JD.
Comment by daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/28/2008 @ 10:58 pm
My ancestors fought slavery, Jack.
I’d say my family’s record is clear.
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/28/2008 @ 11:01 pm
Or, it was founded on the premis of individual freedom, and the rule of law.
I guess it depends on your level of White Guilt, though. But thanks for proving my point, kiddo.
Comment by Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 11/28/2008 @ 11:47 pm
Your family need not have owned slaves for you to have White Guilt, bubba. My uncle is a fine example of that fact, since not a single fore-bearer of mine arrived in this country until after the Civil War, and yet the man holds more WHite Guilt than any Leftist you could care to name.
I know your type very well, son. So ashamed that you’ve just had every break, while the poor black man must struggle for everything…
Well, if you discount racial preference in such things as redistricting, hiring, college aplication, and pre-crash loans (thanks CRA!).
But you hardly let such triffles affect your warped view of America, and what it stands for, do you?
Comment by Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 11/28/2008 @ 11:53 pm
Samantha Powers may indeed be back in the good graces of Obama’s people but I suspect two things are in play. She will never get a postition that would require a congressional hearing and her office is indeed in a building on the Mall but faces the rear alley and has no window.
Comment by Pat Patterspn (f44efe) — 11/29/2008 @ 12:48 am
I’m sure Obama is aware America was founded on slavery, Scott.
Speaking of which, in Barbara Walters’ interview of Obama on Wednesday evening, she mentioned the White House’s Lincoln bedroom. Obama said something about his daughter being inspired to use that location in the future when doing her homework. He said that’s because the Gettysburg Address was signed there.
I said “huh? What’s he talking about?! Why the hell would Lincoln have signed a speech he’d be giving later in public? Or why would he have signed it after the fact, unless it were done as part of a cheap, gimmicky PR event?”
Of course, Obama really meant the Emancipation Proclamation, which is known to have received Lincoln’s signature in the room now designated as the Lincoln Bedroom.
Since Obama and his wife apparently — and finally — are proud to be Americans, they better start understanding the fundamentals of the US’s history, among other things….
“It is wonderful to be back in Oregon,” Obama said. “Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it.”
Comment by Mark (411533) — 11/29/2008 @ 2:27 am
Mr Klompus wrote:
Unfortunately, replacing 88 year old John Paul Stevens with a 48 year old ideological clone really is a negative. Replacing 75 year old Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a 45 year old similarly inclined justice is not a net neutral.
Comment by The mathematical genius Dana (38562b) — 11/29/2008 @ 6:01 am
Obama has done some amazing work. I never thought I’d see the day when bringing Hillary and other clintonistas aboard would so delight conservatives. Truly a changed country.
Comment by imdw (93d36f) — 11/29/2008 @ 6:09 am
I’m sure Obama is aware America was founded on slavery, Scott.
John Adams had slaves?
Comment by Dmac (e30284) — 11/29/2008 @ 8:24 am
Obama wants to sent more soldiers to Afghanistan. I want his EXIT PLAN
Comment by Dennis D (ae900a) — 11/29/2008 @ 8:29 am
Slavery is such a Non Issue.. I wasn’t even 8 Years Old.
Comment by Dennis D (ae900a) — 11/29/2008 @ 8:32 am
Dmac asked:
No, of course not, but in the musical 1776, Edward Rutledge, the Continental Congress delegate from South Carolina, had some of the answer in this song:
Molasses to rum to slaves, oh what a beautiful waltz
You dance with us, we dance with you
Molasses and rum and slaves
Who sails the ships out of Boston
Ladened with bibles and rum?
Who drinks a toast to the Ivory Coast?
Hail Africa, the slavers have come
New England with bibles and rum
And its off with the rum and the bibles
Take on the slaves, clink, clink
Hail and farewell to the smell
Of the African coast
Molasses to rum to slaves
‘Tisn’t morals, ’tis money that saves
Shall we dance to the sound of the profitable pound
In molasses and rum and slaves
Who sails the ships out of Guinea
Ladened with bibles and slaves?
‘Tis Boston can coast to the West Indies coast
Jamaica, we brung what ye craves
Antigua, Barbados, we brung bibles and slaves!
Molasses to rum to slaves
Who sail the ships back to Boston
Ladened with gold, see it gleam
Whose fortunes are made in the triangle trade
Hail slavery, the New England dream!
Mr. Adams, I give you a toast:
Hail Boston! Hail Charleston!
Who stinketh the most?
Our northern brethren cannot be said to have had nothing to do with slavery; it’s just that they found little use for slaves in the north, where the agriculture was of a different type.
Here’s the YouTube. Warning: not completely inoffensive.
Comment by The amused Dana (556f76) — 11/29/2008 @ 8:40 am
Amused Dana, no one denies that slavery existed in the colonies. But that’s a far cry from saying that the United States was founded on slavery.
Comment by Steverino (647a08) — 11/29/2008 @ 9:01 am
“I never thought I’d see the day when bringing Hillary and other clintonistas aboard would so delight conservatives.”
imdw – It’s a matter of degree. Most conservatives are familiar with Hillary and feel she’s a better choce than somebody than such as Ramsey Clark.
On the other hand, you get completely boneheaded appointments like Eric Holder for AG, do it’s a mixed bag.
Comment by daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/29/2008 @ 9:13 am
Slavery has existed in all parts of the World since the beginning of time.
Does that mean that I have any responsibility for the actions of the Pharaoh’s of Egypt, or of the Aztec kings, or of certain existing societies within Africa?
personal disclaimer:
The family of my Paternal Grandmother left Central Europe during the troubles of the 1840′s, and settled in Kansas prior to the Civil War. It is believed that members served on both sides during that great struggle.
Comment by Another Drew (d5aa9e) — 11/29/2008 @ 9:26 am
Yes, and I would expect most everybody else to crawl back from under that bus soon enough. Dissimulation is this man’s name and game; his word means nothing. He has an agenda, and he’s patient. I find it amusing how many conservative pundits — even some who labeled Obama a dangerous leftist –have suddenly been singing songs about his “pragmatism” or “centrism.” Could Obama ever have imagined it would this easy?
His first two years won’t be about economic radicalism anyway. They will be about disabling political dissent. He needs two terms to accomplish “fundamental change” and job number one — always job number one for leftism — is smearing and incapacitating dissent, the organized voices of resistance, the political enemy. And this is a lot easier to do when everybody is breathing a sigh of relief about what a “centrist” you are.
Comment by rrpjr (e98cdc) — 11/29/2008 @ 9:36 am
Does that mean that I have any responsibility for the actions of the Pharaoh’s of Egypt, or of the Aztec kings, or of certain existing societies within Africa?
Yes, and you also bear personal responsibility for the removal/eradication of all of the Indian tribes, Hispanic settlers and the French Fur trappers in the Upper Midwest. Now we all must vote our country out of existence immediately, and give the net proceeds to relatives of these aggrieved people. Only native – owned casinos will be exempt from this edict.
Comment by Dmac (e30284) — 11/29/2008 @ 9:50 am
#59 I never thought I’d see the day when bringing Hillary and other clintonistas aboard would so delight conservatives.
We are not delighted with Obama, we are laughing at Obama. Big difference.
Comment by Perfect Sense (9d1b08) — 11/29/2008 @ 10:01 am
You’re laughing at Obama because he won, PS?
The anti-intellectual voter has a strange sense of humor.
Anything to keep reality at bay.
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/29/2008 @ 11:09 am
and the one who declares that “America got the boot” from Iraq no doubt fancies himself an “intellectual voter.”
Comment by Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 11/29/2008 @ 11:14 am
“intellectual voter.”
How about inter lick ual voter. His tongue so far up O’s ass his shoulders are brown.
Comment by rls (14b9d3) — 11/29/2008 @ 11:29 am
The anti-intellectual voter
This, coming from a poster who never lists any underlying substantiating information to buttress his many fevered rantings. One cannot display more anti – itellectualism in that regard.
Comment by Dmac (e30284) — 11/29/2008 @ 11:35 am
“The anti-intellectual voter has a strange sense of humor.”
“The anti-intellectual voter has no sense of humor, that’s why he/she voted for Obama. Zogby produced a sizeable poll documenting this effect.”
Fixed that for you harelip.
Comment by daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/29/2008 @ 11:40 am
Your post are regular bibliographies too, Dmac.
*giggles like a schoolgirl*
Whatever it take for the right to accept their new ruler is fine with me.
Comment by parsnip (1e884c) — 11/29/2008 @ 11:47 am
Your post are regular bibliographies too, Dmac.
You have a little grammatical error there.
*giggles like a schoolgirl*
It’s good that you can laugh at yourself.
Comment by Dmac (e30284) — 11/29/2008 @ 11:57 am
“Whatever it take for the right to accept their new ruler is fine with me.”
harelip proves the point that anti-intellectuals voted for Obama. The President doesn’t “rule”, he serves the people.
Freaking progressive moron.
Comment by daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/29/2008 @ 12:07 pm
Freaking progressive moron.
Comment by daleyrocks — 11/29/2008 @ 12:07 pm
daley, it is much easier to use the technical, scientific term for the above condition:
Fascist!
Comment by Another Drew (d5aa9e) — 11/29/2008 @ 12:37 pm
Maybe Rev. Wright will show up at the inauguration now.
Comment by Icy Truth (b7d162) — 11/29/2008 @ 12:52 pm
Really… Where was the left’s acceptance of President Bush, eh?
Oh yes that’s right… Rules for thee, but not for me…
I keep forgetting.
Comment by Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 11/29/2008 @ 1:29 pm
garnish writes: “Iraq is over, jack. America got the boot.”
Someone is not reading the real news evidently. Clueless, thy name is Obama-voter.
Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 11/29/2008 @ 5:11 pm
Why does any blog host tolerate alphie and his many identities?
Comment by Rob Crawford (b5d1c2) — 11/29/2008 @ 5:30 pm
[...] would The One (elect) bring back Samantha Powers? Is this a sign that the others who were kicked off his campaign bus are going to return? Are [...]
Pingback by Once Again, It Looks Like Hillary Clinton Has Been …..? : The Pink Flamingo (342d4e) — 11/29/2008 @ 6:18 pm
America was founded on slavery. Interesting comment, turnip/sniffles/alphtard. Care to expound on that?
Comment by JD (5f0e11) — 11/29/2008 @ 7:23 pm
Comment by JD — 11/29/2008 @ 7:23 pm
The question is, was the business model to bring slaves here to establish the colonies, or were they planning on capturing the natives, and sell them into slavery elsewhere?
Since neither Jamestown, or Plymouth, had slaves in their original complement, it would seem that they must have thought that North America was a great source of natives that could be put into the slave trade.
But, if that was their intent, why did they have such a difficult time establishing their initial settlements?
Or, could the entire meme of being “founded on slavery”, be just another Left/Lib fantasy, without any basis in fact, or history?
Comment by Another Drew (d5aa9e) — 11/29/2008 @ 7:32 pm
Parsnip wrote:
In the United States, we don’t normally refer to our presidents as “rulers.” That’s a term more commonly associated with monarchs or dictators.
One wonders if parsnip is showing a form of obeisance rather inconsistent with democracy here.
Comment by The Dana shaking his head in disbelief (556f76) — 11/30/2008 @ 5:54 am
Parsnip wonders why Americans are laughing at Barack-elect. Probably because the office was bought for him.
Disabling cards for fraudulent donations may be funny now. But wait till BHo pulls the real busHitler krap. From a post above, Rule #1 is killing political dissent. We already saw that one fired up with the Truth Squad. And that was before the lawn jockey even got voted in.
Loved Mark’s post about the Barbara Walters show. Obama, mixing up facts and history again … and ABC lets it run.
Sometimes I’m sure that Bush will get the respect he’s due. The sad jerks who think Obama cares about this country are in for a rude awakening. At our expense, of course.
Comment by Vermont Neighbor (5ea336) — 12/1/2008 @ 9:27 am
No doubt root problem will be one of the first to join the Obama citizen squad committee. Keeping Dear Leader safe from criticism, fo shizzle.
Comment by Vermont Neighbor (5ea336) — 12/1/2008 @ 9:28 am