Patterico's Pontifications

4/4/2011

Obama Starts to Make His Case

Filed under: General — Aaron Worthing @ 6:24 am



[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.  Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]

Obama has his first real campaign ad out today and… well, let’s watch it and discuss:

Oy, that is weak.  For starters, they begin with shots of small town America, which immediately makes me remember that “bitter clingers” comment.  Then we have one person saying to get Obama reelected we have to talk about the changes we have made.  You know, like unemployment that kept “unexpectedly” rising.  Debt and deficit numbers which also unexpectedly rose, with little to show for it.  A health care law that no one wanted and is likely to be declared unconstitutional.  And we are no longer in two wars.  We are in three!  Including one which the President willfully violated his oath of office in starting.  Change!

And then we get the young kid talking about hope.  Except the word really, isn’t hope.  It’s wishful thinking.  Seriously read the link, read Stephen Den Beste’s argument and then ask yourself how it applies.  It certainly does to our foreign policy under this President.  He said Gdaffy must go, but he has no idea how to make it happen.  It’s the Underpants Gnome theory of warfare:

Step 1: Enforce a No-Fly Zone

Step 2: ?

Step 3: Regime Change!

He obviously thought that if he called for Gdaffy to step down it would pretty much happen on its own.

And then finally you get the guy in the ad saying he doesn’t agree with everything Obama has said and done, but he respects and trusts the man.  Which has to be the most maddening part of the ad.  Now, first, I didn’t see any part of the ad claiming that these were not paid actors, so I presume that this line was written by an someone else.  And even if he said this honestly and spontaneously, this is not raw video.  They edited this to choose the best messages.  And this is the best message, in their minds. Sure, you don’t agree with the guy, but just put that aside and trust the man.  Don’t think for yourself, or at least let your own opinions change how you will vote.  Just vote for the guy.

Does that even make sense in the context of reelection?  That, according to this man, there is no one the GOP could nominate that he would respect and trust more than the President, who might even agree with him more often?  It is an open pitch for slavish following, and unsuited for the leader of a free republic.

It’s only the first salvo, I know, but oy vey, that is weak.

[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]

98 Responses to “Obama Starts to Make His Case”

  1. Step 1-Enforce a No-Fly Zone

    Step 2-Show off his moobs.

    Step 3-Regime Change!

    Step 4-Uh…….

    DohBiden (984d23)

  2. He’s the second coming.

    President B.S. Obama (911aa5)

  3. As already commented ailswhere this a.m. …

    F*CK the narrative people. Forget it. From the bunker, the ONLY thing Khalid Sheikh Obama is going to do being removed from office, is continue on the same path. To destroy America.

    Even if G*d can’t get a flight back, from his vacation on Bimini. Beuerawk duh Mageek Ponay’s done. Finis (pudda giant fork in ‘im). That turd WILL be flushed.

    Til then? Hold on mofo’s … hold on.

    Elmo (614513)

  4. EXTREME

    Rodan (03e5c2)

  5. Aaron — please don’t buy into the “two wars” nonsense that the Left has been pushing since we got into Iraq.

    Hint: how many wars was the U.S. involved in between 1941 and 1945??

    Iraq and Afghanistan are two theaters of operation, but it’s the same war.

    Libya, on the other hand, is a new conflict that is not part of the larger strategy of why we got involved in Iraq & Afghanistan. That counts as a second war. But not a third. A second.

    Alex (9d4b11)

  6. “Ailswhere”? Please, enough with the cutesy spelling. It’s tiring to read and it’s not amusing.

    Alex (9d4b11)

  7. I left out the ‘e’ … sorry.

    Elmo (614513)

  8. the douche parade of deeply feckless Team R challengers must be very encouraging for bumble … what’s ironic and sad sad sad is that he’s the primary beneficiary of the lowering-of-the-bar that his own election represented

    happyfeet (71628d)

  9. there has to be a word, beyond surreal, that describes this ad, it’s like Seinfeld, except that was about something.

    narciso (b545d5)

  10. It’s a good add nonetheless,though i’m not sure of it’s effectiveness.

    GSMPedia (568f58)

  11. When you look at the video, quite clearly that is an ad whose target audience and purpose is not the general voting public. No. It was created to show to, and inspire, re-election staff, OFA zombies, participants at small local Dem kick-off fundraisers, and the left leaning blog sites to get “the troops” re-motivated. It is meant to start getting potential boots on the ground engaged and both energized and organized like they were for the (former) Messiah in 2008. It will be shown on college campus job fairs, probably with some paid “re-elect Obama” positions and summer jobs in the mix.

    It is a classic Axelrod product. It subtly focused its points on strengths and weaknesses about Obama that have shown up in their internal polls. Will he be able to catch lightening in a bottle twice? I doubt it. I sure hope not. Still, realistically they are months ahead of the Repubs, who are not even close to settling on a candidate. Then, after what will likely be a brutal intra party battle during the primary season, whoever the R candidate ends up being, that person will be way way behind in getting together a staff and an army of committed volunteers, not to mention fundraising.

    Ugh. Will the nation as a whole be so disillusioned and so sick of Barry and the Dems by then that all the community organizing in the world will not help them. Let us hope so.

    elissa (8a5611)

  12. Did President Obama steal his 2012 re-election campaign slogan from a rival? http://t.co/pau3Yqu

    Dan (403904)

  13. More magical thinking from the Obama administration and its’ fellow travelers and useful idiots. Clue#1:it is not enough to change the name to alter reality.Clue#2: Wishing won’t make it so.

    BarSinister (a9e7f6)

  14. The teleology of our president and lack of a concrete plan to actually remove Gaddafi speaks to what is at the heart of the issue – immense egoism – not a lack of foreign policy knowledge nor an unsurety about how to proceed but simply believing in the power of himself.

    By calling on Gadaffi to step down, he likely believed it would happen simply because he wished it so, and that there was no contingency plan in place revealed the utter belief he has in himself. Fears of incompetency never cross his mind.

    There is something enormously self-important and illusionary in believing in this power of one’s will. And yet because of strong media reinforcement of this, the campaign will naturally attempt to refuel that same fire through a warm, fuzzy offering like the campaign ad above. It’s very easy to appeal to and manipulate people’s emotions rather than compelling them to think and question. And the converse of that is also true: it’s always easier to react emotionally than to do the hard work of thinking.

    Reality is so completely superfluous.

    Dana (9f3823)

  15. As Elissa says, this isn’t an ad to convince people to vote for President Obama in 2012. This ad is designed to convince his past and future supporters to enlist in the 2012 campaign. I think it’s very effective if you view this as the Obama campaign’s first effort to mobilize and organize its supporters.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  16. in a huge stroke of irony, my browser is showing me that stupid “friday, friday, friday” song on the main page, rather than Ear Leader’s useless guavno.

    only when i clicked over to chortle about it did the dreck appear, but fortunately, it still being a free country, i don’t have to actually subject myself to it. after all, when you know someone is lying, there is rarely reason to quantify the lies themselves.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  17. Red

    um, are you saying that this site is showing that song, on this post?

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  18. Back to the future…

    NYT, 11/6/2012

    OBAMA WINS SECOND TERM BY A LANDSLIDE

    President Barack Obama won a second term last night, defeating Republican challenger Sarah Palin. Mr. Obama carried 49 out of 50 states and won 63.5% of the popular vote.

    Zoubida (0692b1)

  19. Zoubida– everyone loves being around a sunny optimist.

    elissa (8a5611)

  20. “plus he got a job!”

    That was my favorite part of the ad. Yeah, he’s got a job, but he’s usually on vacation or golfing, and otherwise simply running for reelection, lady.

    How remarkable that for Obama ‘he got a job!’ is a major change.

    I sure hope the left is full of Zoubidas who no longer worry that the election will be a challenge. They relied on an underdog theme in 2008, and I think that sense is more difficult to build now that Obama is president.

    After all, if Obama really is as great as they said he would be, he will win a Reagan level landslide. You don’t need to pour your donations in, or volunteer, democrats, because we’ve all seen exactly what Obama has to offer, how hard he works, how brilliant he is on cutting the deficit and winning allies abroad.

    Because the left knows Obama is a miserable failure, they know better than to assume victory, even against a controversial candidate like Palin. Whatever candidate the GOP chooses will probably have Palin’s willingness to directly attack Obama. How is Zoubida going to handle that?

    Dustin (c16eca)

  21. Comment by Zoubida — 4/4/2011 @ 10:49 am

    HIS NAME WILL NOT APPEAR ON ALL FIFTY STATE’S BALLOTS (it won’t).

    He’s not going to be reelected. Period [and yeah, I will take bets (but only slabs a tasty vinyl … economy being what it is)]. It’s simply going to be one long hard cold brutal slog through hell. Until November 6, 2012. Beyond anything we have seen before.

    Elmo (614513)

  22. Elmo, if it comes to pass that he has to provide new documentation to get on new ballots, he will provide it. Even if you take the POV of a hardcore birther who thinks he was born in Kenya (to say the least, I am not of that view), then you have to admit he is capable of producing a forgery.

    More likely: an injunction, based on the notion this is an additional requirement not provided in the constitution (a weak argument, I think) would prevent states from excluding the president from their ballots.

    Anyhow, as a practical matter, the states where it is politically feasible to exclude Obama were not swing or blue states, so they mean nothing to Obama’s chances. If anything, they give his operation much more steam, now that they are ‘oppressed’.

    Trust me, birther issues will not decide the election. I do think it’s a great reform to make sure candidates are eligible before an election, but it’s not going to get in Obama’s way, I am quite sure.

    I think you’re right that this is going to be a brutal and ugly election, and I think it’s going to hinge on the economy.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  23. Furthermore, how is one state going to tell another state that their certification of someone’s birth is not acceptable? States practically must accept the word of other states, which is what the certification of live birth amounts to. I think however this issue plays out, Obama has a lot of chances to benefit from the chaos, and very little downside. It’s frustrating to think he is feeding on doubt in a way that weakens the Republic.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  24. The issue of his ‘birth’ as it were. Is simply too far ranging, too wide, too great. There’s are just too many questions, inconsistencies, misdirections. Far too many. A giant mountain of nothing. Taller than Everest.

    Even the best fiction writer could not have created this English Garden on Acid. And it will not go away. And isn’t [Chucklehead can only shuck and jive for so long (amazing his endurance though … tha sheet’s gunna hit the fan sometime …).

    Mombasa? Sure, it is in fact possible. Sans any contemporaneous proof, of any kind, of his birth/birthright. Because if it did exist? WE WOULD HAVE SEEN IT BY NOW. But it doesn’t (wherever he actually was born).

    DO NOT (I repeat) underestimate the States. At all. They have no intention of giving up. None. Believe.

    Hell is already here … strangely, the libturd nation thinks we’ve gone on the big yellow bus … to Disneyland

    Elmo (614513)

  25. And:

    then you have to admit he is capable of producing a forgery

    Sure, of course. Obama operatives, accessed the Hawaiian atomic file, six times in one five week period alone (last year). In person. In the flesh. As in not the duly authorized member of Hawaian State govt. who is charged with their care. Nor any other official fed govt employee.

    And it only took them SIX tries, to scribble, in the margin, of one non-descript page … bbbborn in duh USA.

    So now, it’s official!

    Elmo (614513)

  26. DO NOT (I repeat) underestimate the States. At all. They have no intention of giving up. None. Believe.

    What do you mean? What swing states or blue states are going to kick Obama off the ballot? How would they prevent an injunction or forgery? And what about the fact that they have to give full faith and credit to eachother on the matter of whether or not a person was born in their state? Hawaii has repeatedly claimed Obama was born there.

    So maybe YOU need to stop underestimating states.

    Going on and on about how bad you feel about it isn’t an argument for why states should lose their authority to say someone was born in their jurisdiction, which Hawaii has repeatedly done.

    And honestly, do you know Obama wasn’t born there? I think you only know that he’s played a game with this issue, and have suspicions about his clouded background.

    By all means, let’s reform out ballots to require all candidates to demonstrate eligibility. Just don’t be fooled. This will not affect Obama, even if you assume the worst about him. We shouldn’t waste our time interrupting productive arguments about Obama with birther rants.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  27. elissa

    > Zoubida– everyone loves being around a sunny optimist.

    funny definition of optimism that results in my nightmare scenario.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  28. You ARE wrong about the States (and confused).

    Just wait.

    Just watch.

    Just see.

    Elmo (614513)

  29. As in not the duly authorized member of Hawaian State govt. who is charged with their care. Nor any other official fed govt employee.

    What ‘official fed govt employee’ are you talking about? I thought you were going on about states rights. It sounds like you respect states rights so long as they don’t use their rights to say Obama was born in their state.

    Sorry, but Hawaii at many levels, with ‘duly authorized’ officials up to Governor, repeatedly and directly certify Obama was born there. You can ignore all the paper thrown around and just note that the Governor has certified it personally. It’s closed issue as to whether Hawaii officially says Obama was born there, and I also think it’s a closed issue whether or not that is sufficient evidence for other states.

    Sure, that isn’t proof. You have to take that issue up with Hawaii because of this states rights issue.

    Anyhow, you call any evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii a forgery. Don’t you see the problem? You have no end game that realistically keeps Obama out of office, do you? I’m not saying your issue isn’t serious… maybe it is (it’s not clear from how you present yourself), but what’s the point of all the ranting?

    Is it to help reelect Obama? As far as I can tell, that’s what you’re doing. Do you understand how you’re helping Obama?

    Dustin (c16eca)

  30. You ARE wrong about the States (and confused).

    Just wait.

    Just watch.

    Just see.

    Comment by Elmo

    No.

    Provide a detailed argument that specifically answers my points instead of hysterically insisting you’re right 50 times in a row.

    I have explained at multiple levels how your plan isn’t going to work, and you just say ‘you’re wrong’? I don’t think you’re a moby, given your other comments, but I do think a lot of mobies will try to keep this issue alive. They know how much this hampers the right and helps Obama; do you?

    Anyway, let’s boil it down, elmo: prove Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii, right now. Justify yourself.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  31. Wow. How utterly clueless. But, I’ll give you four (self) links to mull/mutter (if you dare!):

    anechoicroom.blogspot.com/2009/06/paypas-vee-need-tu-see-zee-paypas.html

    anechoicroom.blogspot.com/2009/07/wrong.html

    anechoicroom.blogspot.com/2009/07/genie-is-out-of-bottle_30.html

    anechoicroom.blogspot.com/2009/08/point-of-no-return.html

    Deactivated the hyperlinks (not why I’m here).

    Elmo (614513)

  32. Anyway, let’s boil it down, elmo: prove Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii, right now. Justify yourself.

    Comment by Dustin — 4/4/2011 @ 11:47 am

    What a clown. One would think they might want proof. Of his birth.

    BUT NONE EXISTS.

    Elmo (614513)

  33. Elmo

    > One would think they might want proof. Of his birth.

    > BUT NONE EXISTS.

    um, you are saying obama wasn’t born. then what happened? was he grown in a vat?

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  34. Well Aaron, the commonly held belief, by the left. Is that wee merry birthers, believe Khalid Sheikh Obama … was hatched!

    🙂

    Elmo (614513)

  35. Elmo, you can call me clueless, but given your somewhat fanatical tone, I think if you had proof, you’d offer it.

    There’s the rub. Hillary’s 2008 campaign and the many birthers out there haven’t been able to prove Obama was born anywhere else. No evidence that he was born outside the USA has survived scrutiny (And indeed, there have been forgeries, such as that newsmax Kenyan birth certificate… note that whoever made that committed a crime against all Americans).

    Given all the energy expended, you’d think Elmo would have something better than ‘I want more proof Obama was born in Hawaii’. You’d think he’d have some kind of evidence that Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii, or his tenor is unjustified.

    Would I put it past Obama to lie about where he was born? No, though if he did he has somehow hidden fraud extremely well.

    So when I ask Elmo, point blank, what evidence he has that Obama wasn’t born here, instead of Elmo honestly admitting “hey, I have no evidence, but simply don’t believe Obama’s evidence” he instead calls me a clown.

    I’m not a clown, Elmo. I’m giving you a much more serious and fair response than birthers usually get. I loath Obama’s policies. I think verifying eligibility is a needed reform. I’m just asking you to back up your own words.

    So that’s how you’re helping Obama, Elmo. That’s why they want the birther issue to come up all through the reelection. It is dominated by fanatics, and reasonable people want to know what evidence they have to be so sure Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii. You push these people to not trust you when your response is “clown!”. You push these people to see this unreasonable fanaticism as racism or stupidity.

    And you’ve sucked all the oxygen out of the room, birther. We’ve got proof Obama shouldn’t reelected. His own claims about the urgency of cutting the deficit, his own promise that it was unconstitutional to bomb a country without congressional authorization, his own promise to keep unemployment below 8%. The debt he’s brought, the disasters Obamacare will bring, the mess he’s made of foreign policy.

    When you ignore all those STRONG arguments, and instead make a WEAK argument, low information voters are convinced you are wrong. They make the reasonable, yet lazy, assumption that fanatics started with their best argument, and if Elmo’s best argument is that Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii, then he should have had some freaking proof.

    So stop doing Obama’s political mission of overcoming his record for him.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  36. Here’s two things Elmo and this Obama ad have in common: they don’t tell you whether America is better or worse now than in 2008. They don’t mention Obamacare, supposedly Obama’s chief initiative.

    Again, I don’t think Elmo is a moby or otherwise insincere, but I do think it’s amazing what Obama isn’t saying.

    You’d think he’d be shouting from the rooftops all about Obamacare. It must really bother him that his promises that the price he paid, politically, for Obamacare (the 2010 election) is not yielding anything long term, politically. But he must badly hope Americans can settle for a message of ‘change’ and ‘the road is long, and I need 4 more years to change America a lot’, instead of focusing on the things Obama did.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  37. dustin

    at hot air they compared this ad to a viagra ad. they can’t quite say what the pill does, but there is alot of winking and nodding going on.

    michelle malkin noted however an inverse viagra effect on our economy.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  38. I think if you had proof, you’d offer it.

    Are you really that dense?

    I’m NOT President. Of the Untied States Of America.

    Call me whatever you want. Feel free. Please do.

    Elmo (614513)

  39. I think Costanza’s description of the pitch for the Seinfeld show is more apt.

    narciso (b545d5)

  40. that one Obamahoochie with all the fruit is a lot on the ball she is a Good American cause of we know how arduous it is to have the fruit but by God she has the fruit and God Bless America

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  41. I’m not a clown, Elmo. I’m giving you a much more serious and fair response than birthers usually get

    then runs into:

    So that’s how you’re helping Obama, Elmo. That’s why they want the birther issue to come up all through the reelection.

    And:

    So stop doing Obama’s political mission of overcoming his record for him.

    Your disingenuousness … rather pathetic, really. Go ‘head, be part of the groupthink. It rather suits you.

    Elmo (614513)

  42. Are you really that dense?

    I’m NOT President. Of the Untied States Of America.

    Call me whatever you want. Feel free. Please do.

    I wish I had more physical density, but I’m afraid I make too much delicious food, and that war is lost. Thanks for the concern.

    No, you aren’t the president, elmo. You are the guy who is repeatedly insisting he is not legitimate, and telling Republicans there is no reason to fight hard in the 2012 election because you know, for sure, that Obama will be unable to win in 2012 because of a legal maneuver.

    For those two points, you have absolutely no evidence. Far, far less than Obama has offered to show he was born in Hawaii, since, after all, the state of Hawaii claims he was and its governor even claims to remember it personally.

    I’m not trying to call you whatever I want, Elmo. I’m not even trying to insult you. I suspect you and I will feel the same way, the day after the 2012 election. Hopefully we will both be relieved that Obama has been defeated. So frankly, I’m calling you an ally who is making two mistakes. The first mistake is that you underestimate Obama’s chances of reelection severely. Whoever our nominee is, they will face coordinated and sophisticated lies that were constructed by professional smear masters. Slut, traitor, lazy, privileged, chickenhawk, thief, and stupid, only I can’t predict how they will weave all that together the way they will. I just know they will. Meanwhile, Obama will be sanctified. The primary way to sanctify Obama will be to utilize fanatical opponents to make Obama the victim.

    This is a hard reality, and it is effective. Obama is a great politician and if we beat him, it will be because we ignored your claim that victory is assured.

    If you reread my comments, you’ll see I could also be called a birther. I say I wouldn’t put it past Obama to lie about his birth, and I’ll say his evidence is hardly proof positive, albeit it’s stronger than the (lack of) evidence he was born elsewhere. Donald Trump does a pretty good job of explaining that he’s seen a lot of frauds in his time, and he just thinks Obama’s entire background is cloudy, so he wants to see as much as possible.

    He’s not fanatical about it, but rather just honest. He’s not pretending to know Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii, so he avoids the trap where someone asks him to back up his claims. You can sneer that you don’t have to prove anything, but yeah, you totally do have to back up your repetitive ranting, or the MSM can portray Obama as the victim of bitter clingers.

    So I think you should adjust your birther argument to be a little kinder, even assume the best of Obama while asking for verification and more information about his entire background. That works. You also should stop taking the 2012 election for granted. We have very hard work.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  43. You are the guy who is … telling Republicans there is no reason to fight hard in the 2012 election

    Don’t put words in my mouth. What a tool.

    There are a million reasons he won’t be attending a/his second inauguration. A million. ONE MILLION.

    The States, the birth cert, deathcare, Labia, ad infinitum.

    Project away. Bout my beliefs. My intentions. Knock ya’self out.

    the state of Hawaii claims he was and its governor even claims to remember it personally. …. Moby be thy name.

    The first mistake is that you underestimate Obama’s chances of reelection severely.

    No, I don’t. Perhaps you may want to invert your reality? … And stop watching CNN/CBS/MSNBC/al Jizz.

    assume the best of Obama

    I’d say let’s compare drug tests. But you really are so far divorced from reality. It doesn’t/wouldn’t make a whit of a diff.

    Cheap shot: try some decaf gunga din …

    Elmo (614513)

  44. Elmo, you realize that you sound completely unhinged, right?

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  45. Elmo, the idea that we don’t “dare” consider Obama’s actual birthplace is utterly insane.

    Which matches the usual insanity of Birthers. Birthers have broken logic centers. Because they insist on believing a set of alleged “facts” that are not logically consistent, insist on making up facts and law out of whole cloth, and then get all excited that people with functioning logic centers ridicule them.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  46. And so … ?

    There’s no way around the lunacy, madness, and insanity that now pervades all.

    It’s all crazy on its face. Beyond belief.

    I’ve spent far, far too much time … looking, reading, studying. Since the first mention, of the birth cert.

    And, at that first blog post, that I stumbled upon (two years ago) … said to meself … dees peeps … is nuts (yeah, I did).

    There are a lot more questions, than answers (8 trillion … to one). But Newt nailed it, in an interview with Greta, some time back:

    Loose/recollected paraphrase:

    Look, there are people who have honest questions. Real questions. And they simply are not being answered. And the failure to answer (ed: going on two years now) will cost him. In votes.

    Elmo (614513)

  47. Cheap shot: try some decaf gunga din …

    I think this is the most amusing part of your comment. You’re in for a rude awakening. Within weeks of the GOP settling on a nominee and the MSM has ramped up the narrative, you will understand.

    This will be the fourth presidential election I have worked on. I know Obama is a great politician, even though he’s a terrible president, and your theories that we don’t need to worry about 2012 for “one millions reasons” show you are hopelessly naive.

    You mentioned projection, and I think it’s clear you are using that compensation measure to call me divorced from reality, or on drugs, etc.

    There’s only one way to defeat Obama in 2012: persuade the voters. That’s why you actually do need that proof for all your ranting. You open that big mouth and spew endless nonsense, but can’t back it up, and people are persuaded against you. You inject birther hysteria into a discussion that should be focused on Obama’s record, and you protect Obama from the arguments that actually harmed Obama’s chances.

    And at his point, you know I’m right, Elmo. You are putting your own ego ahead of your country’s need to see Obama defeated. Thanks a lot, pal.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  48. Elmo, the idea that we don’t “dare” consider Obama’s actual birthplace is utterly insane.

    Another one, putting words in my mouth. Geebus (what do you call that? Oh right … see below italicized excise … functioning logic):

    then get all excited that people with functioning logic centers ridicule them.

    Am I somehow supposed to be impressed?

    Elmo (614513)

  49. Can any GOP nominee once and for all simply explain to the kids that SSI and Medicare are not only broke, but intergenerational theft? Take the gloves off already and lay the trurth before them wihout fear and hesitation, but cold ahrd facts.

    Bugg (9e308e)

  50. we don’t need to worry about 2012

    If you want to continue, in repetion, putting words in my mouth? Then your just having a conversation with … yourself.

    Thanks a lot, pal.

    You don’t need me to stretch your own salami.

    Elmo (614513)

  51. Look, there are people who have honest questions. Real questions. And they simply are not being answered.

    Yeah, that’s sort of the mantra of virtually all tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists: “I’m just asking questions here. But you have to wonder, why aren’t they getting answered? What are they hiding? And on and on it goes.

    I believe that you have spent “far, far too much time … looking, reading, studying…” this issue. You’re invested in it. At this point, you couldn’t possibly come to the conclusion that you’ve been wasting your time chasing shadows.

    Kman (5576bf)

  52. Elmo is reminding me of the Truther we were infested with a month or two back. What was her name?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  53. Look, there are people who have honest questions. Real questions. And they simply are not being answered. And the failure to answer (ed: going on two years now) will cost him. In votes.

    Like I said, it’s possible to present the birther case in a less hysterical way. I’m not sure how well that will persuade anyone who voted for Obama in 2008. I’m quite sure it isn’t as persuasive as the deficit or his flip flopping record. But it probably won’t hurt the GOP candidate very much if it’s presented intelligently.

    Obama’s failure to answer people who forged his Kenyan birth certificate, or invented insane ideas about how he isn’t a naturally born citizen if his father was british, or to ignore someone who claims they are sure he wasn’t born in hawaii: that doesn’t hurt him at all. He’s refusing to dignify jerks. People love that. That’s presidential. You’re creating an issue where Obama looks tempered and wise merely for doing nothing.

    Elmo, can you admit that you don’t know that Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii? That there is no evidence that he wasn’t? That there is evidence that he was, even though you aren’t convinced by it? It seems like when you’re asked to be serious and fair with this serious issue, you call me a clown on drugs who watched “Al Jizz”.

    You’re getting the fairest response from me imaginable. I’d be justified to call you an idiot, but I’m trying to make you a more persuasive part of the coalition against Obama.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  54. Elmo

    i am satified that he was born in america, although i think presidents should be required to prove it in more than the court of public opinion before they are able to become president.

    That being said, we should focus on the sheer crapitude of the last 2 years rather than whether he was born in america or not. i mean feel free to go and do your own investigation. good luck with that, but we are going to to focus on the fact that he is not up to the job.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  55. What was her name?

    blubonnet, I think.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  56. I’ll take that a disinvite, to further participation Aaron (yeah … watch the door).

    Elmo (614513)

  57. Elmo, no reason not to stay around and talk politics. Just be prepared for people to disagree with you.

    Hell, yesterday, Patterico himself made an argument that didn’t work, and the commenters didn’t let it go. He had the ability to handle that disagreement with class, and even changed his mind. If you’re not willing to change your mind or listen to other POVs, why did you come into a discussion forum in the first place? Just to preach at us? That’s kinda boring.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  58. Actually, I’ve never seen anyone present a case that Obama is not constitutionally eligible for President based on his birth that did not include making up facts or law or both.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  59. And then finally you get the guy in the ad saying he doesn’t agree with everything Obama has said and done, but he respects and trusts the man… They edited this to choose the best messages. And this is the best message, in their minds.

    I thought that was the smartest part of the ad. And Michael Scherer at Time explains why:

    Obama will be running on his character. The most interesting quote of the video comes from the southern white guy. “I don’t agree with Obama on everything. But I respect him and I trust him.”… The reasoning behind this line can be found in a recent Associated Press poll. As of late March, 53% of the country approved of the way Obama was doing his job as president. But 59% said they had a favorable view of Obama, 59% said Obama “cares about people like” them, and 84% said he was a likable person. Obama would rather make his pitch to 84% of the country than from 53% of the country. That white guy from North Carolina represents the gap between.

    Kman (5576bf)

  60. Actually, I’ve never seen anyone present a case that Obama is not constitutionally eligible for President based on his birth that did not include making up facts or law or both.

    I agree. It’s one thing to say Obama isn’t eligible, which requires some damn evidence, and another to talk about this like Trump does, which is to say you just don’t trust the way Obama’s handled this issue, and find it curious.

    When asked for evidence, the birther will either admit they don’t have any, or they will enter hysterical mode.

    Trump’s argumentation is a lot less corrosive to the right than Elmo’s, but it’s still a huge distraction from Aaron’s argumentation. We can’t win an election without convincing voters, and the best argument for that is Obama’s actual ‘leadership’, for which we have plenty of evidence.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  61. And I don’t mean to ignore SPQR’s point about the ridiculous legal ideas invented by some birthers. That is so annoying I don’t even want to talk about it. So I guess I do ignore that, but SPQR’s right about them.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  62. Kman

    > I thought that was the smartest part of the ad.

    sure, pure servile worship. its a winning argument for you, given you already do that with the S.C.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  63. Kman

    btw, maybe its not so smart about the ad. if there is going to be a bradley effect, that’s where it would manifest the most. they say they like the president as a person, respect him, etc., because it doesn’t require them to agree with him on anything, so its their way of saying, I don’t have anything against him personally, and thus deflecting concerns about racism.

    one good way to check is to see how he does on a similar question in a rasmussen poll, with their robo-calling method.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  64. Getting back to the ad itself, Elissa #12 and DRJ #16 are right that this ad is aimed at Obama supporters… and, I will add, the mushy middle of voters whose votes Obama needs.

    Thus, in evaluating Obama’s re-election campaign (which includes everything he does and says from this date onward), the best way to judge its effectiveness is not from the perspective of someone who dislikes Obama (yes, I am talking to you!) but rather from the perspective of their target audience, i.e., someone who isn’t hardcore anti-Obama and who pays and cares a whole lot less attention than you do to such things as the shortcomings of Obama’s Libya policy.

    steve (369bc6)

  65. “Obama’s policies aren’t good, I know that. He’s ramped up the deficit and trampled on my civil rights, and he’s even broken his oath of office, by his own claims about presidential powers. But, by golly, I like him. Isn’t that what really matters? Paid for by Citizens for a Stupid Government.”

    Dustin (c16eca)

  66. This thread, IMO, is a case study in a fairly successful threadjack. Somebody’s mission today was to turn this away from a thoughtful conversation on Barry’s re-election kick-off and strategy, and to turn it into a raging birther thread. Mission accomplished!!

    elissa (8a5611)

  67. Elissa: don’t most threads suffer that fate?

    steve (369bc6)

  68. elissa, I thought it was particularly odd how focused he was on saying Obama’s not a real threat in the 2012 election.

    I’m trying to imagine how that would work. Suppose some red state kicks Obama off the ballot. How does this hurt Obama? Now he’s got a huge victim mentality argument going for him. There would probably be race hustling riots, and low info voters would vote for Obama out of pure spite. People resent having their choice taken away. You can’t win an election that way.

    I guess part of the reason this thread isn’t talking about much else is that his advert is so timid. Kman’s somewhat right. Its best argument is from a guy who thinks Obama’s policies are wrong.

    Right now, both sides are appealing mainly toward donations, rather than swing voters. So what’s remarkable about the democrats is that they have no red meat! The GOP’s ads are full of red meat, but the democrats have no ‘fierce moral urgency’ arguments because Obama has no core principles.

    GITMO, deficit reduction, real single payer health care socialism, … Obama just can’t be lifted with red meat anymore until the GOP selects a nominee for the democrats to demonize.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  69. steve

    i appreciate that this is aimed at the true believers… but… my god, even for that limited purpose, these are vacuous ads.

    Aaron Worthing (73a7ea)

  70. He obviously thought that if he called for Gdaffy to step down it would pretty much happen on its own.


    Hey, it worked perfectly with Saddam!

    The Big 0 just hasn’t learned the proper incantations to make when he makes these kind of mystical calls to Change the universe…

    Bush had Cheney and Rumsfeld to accomplish that.

    IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (c9dcd8)

  71. The ads may seem vacuous but I think the campaign’s goal is to recruit a certain kind of people to Obama’s team:

    “Are you not sure about politics? Do you like the idea of President Obama but you’re not sure whose ideas are best? Join Obama 2012, because many of your neighbors feel the same way and they are joining our team.”

    That’s why the NC guy who expresses doubts about Obama’s policies is the most powerful voice in that commercial. They want to win back people who have doubts, and we know a lot of Obama supporters are having doubts. Seeing an attractive, articulate white guy express doubts but still say he is signing up will resonate with a lot of people.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  72. ==i appreciate that this is aimed at the true believers… but… my god, even for that limited purpose, these are vacuous ads.==

    Yeah. So? Vacuous ads for vacuous people. You gotta problem wid dat, A.W.?

    elissa (8a5611)

  73. I disagree that this is aimed at vacuous people. I think it’s aimed at people who have limited time for politics.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  74. DRJ, I guess it really depends on how vacuous you consider his previous feet in the street supporters–his posse–to be. I consider the high school and college kids who rang doorbells and engaged strangers with ridiculous talking points, the OFA idiots who copied letters to send under fake names to local papers, and the parents who allowed their children to make Barack Hussein Obama mmm mmm mmm videos to be pretty darn vacuous. And these are the very same people or types of people the new video appears to be targeting to get involved in the 2012 campaign.

    That said, as I mentioned back at #12, I think the piece actually does do a decent job at reaching the groups it was designed to reach at this early stage of the campaign.

    elissa (8a5611)

  75. vacuous is in the eye of the beholder.

    steve (254463)

  76. Not to contribute to the birther-driven hijacking, but there’s a friggin’ undisputed newspaper announcement regarding his birth in a Hawaiian paper of the time.

    a) If he was born in Kenya, then he STILL has US citizenship by jus sanguinis, his mother was a citizen. There’s no valid reason to “establish” his birth in the USA in 1959 except…

    b) The notion that his mother/parents wanted to give him a chance to become PotUS — that’s the ONLY notable advantage which “native birth” grants one…. Wake up: THIS WAS 1959 folks!! There was NO ONE who realized how quickly the whole race thing would actually reverse itself, such that a affluent black man and his family were the subjects of the #1 TV show for several years running by the mid-late 1980s — you can’t do that without the vast majority of people in the nation having no problems with racial equality. Furthermore, his mother was an ultraliberal socialist type, who almost certainly didn’t believe in the least that the USA would be able to reverse racial course that fast. She almost certainly thought a Marxist revolution would be needed to change the structure of things.

    Q.E.D., he was born here in Hawaii, as there’s no reason to bother entering that newspaper announcement as-was.

    Now, as to why he refuses to show the “long-form” Birth Certificate, my bet is that it has some politically and/or socially embarrassing detail built into it, most likely (as a complete guess, mind you), “Father: Unknown”.

    IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (c9dcd8)

  77. This thread, IMO, is a case study in a fairly successful threadjack. Somebody’s mission today was to turn this away from a thoughtful conversation on Barry’s re-election kick-off and strategy, and to turn it into a raging birther thread. Mission accomplished!!

    This thread is a good example of how, if the right does not get itself together as a cohesive group supporting the best candidate (?), it will eat itself alive. The left will have little to do and might not even need to demonize the nominee because we will be so fractured and split apart that they will just need to wait for the implosion and glide right in to office. And it will no doubt occur over some ridiculous like Obama’s birth. The pressing issues that we should be talking about: the economy, terrorism, deficit reduction, Obamacare, three wars, etc, will be pushed to the background while we shoot ourselves in the foot.

    If people can’t resist being pulled into an obvious manipulation to distract on a blog thread, well….

    Dana (9f3823)

  78. elissa,

    Haven’t we all had a time in our lives when we really, really wanted to believe in something or someone? As time goes on, we realize there is no magic answer or person, but most of us are willing to consider the power of charismatic leadership. This is the concept Obama’s campaign wants to revive.

    As for this ad, the people who let their children make Obama videos are already on board and donating money. College students are probably on board, too, unless they’ve tried to get a job — in which case some of them will get disillusioned and sit out this election, some will campaign for other candidates, and some will volunteer as Obama campaign interns and hope for a paid gig to tide them over. Dreams die hard, elissa. I know. I’m still a Palin supporter.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  79. I find the birth certificate thing, one of the weekest threads, it says something that Scherer
    has to explain the video, like a good Journolista

    narciso (b545d5)

  80. ==Dreams die hard, elissa. I know. I’m still a Palin supporter==

    Heh.
    Dreams die hard. Oh, how I know that, DRJ. I still regret that I was too young to vote for Goldwater.

    elissa (8a5611)

  81. Dana at 5:50–

    What you so aptly described keeps me awake at night, too.

    elissa (8a5611)

  82. if the right does not get itself together as a cohesive group supporting the best candidate

    Best candidate? There’s no indication whatsoever that a best candidate is being sought much less is even in any kind of meaningful demand by a slackadaisacal Team R electorate what is quite happy to babble endlessly about planned freaking parenthood as their little country is spent into eternal whoredom. There is a huge problem with a vast number of prospective Team R candidates being dirty stupid slags. Gingrich Palin Pawlenty Romney?

    Jesus that’s pitiful it’s Bad News Bears all over again and no Walter Matthau in sight to whip them into shape why cause they don’t wanna work they just wanna purse their pretty lips and blow Reaganesque sunshines up our little country’s ass.

    It’s embarrassing to be a Team R person anymore where’s the beef? Paul Ryan and Mr. Daniels have all the beefs and the rest of the Team R monkeys are stumbling around as beefless as they are opportunistic.

    This won’t end well.

    happyfeet (71628d)

  83. hf,

    I saw an interview with Butler’s coach who said when his team entered the NCAA tournament, they posted a sign on each player’s locker reminding them that they weren’t going to play perfectly. I think his point was that you don’t have to be perfect to win, but trying to make everything go perfectly can doom you.

    By the way, GO Butler!!!

    DRJ (fdd243)

  84. happyfeet,

    That’s precisely why I noted best candidate with a question mark. At this point in time, the whole possible lot depress me. I’m at the point where I’m thinking at least with Trump we know he is a spendthrift who knows a bit about economics, and would bring some glamour to the WH. Team R, as you call it, is looking good for 2016 w/Ryan and Rubio and Christie, etc., but 2012 is making me nauseous. My greatest fear is we will be forced once again to vote simply for the lesser of two evils rather than for a strong, robust candidate who has our whole-hearted support because of the unwavering conservative positions they hold as well as having the charisma, knowledge and experience necessary.

    Dana (9f3823)

  85. Ryan/Rubio is the future!… I think a lot of more serious candidates are shirking a responsibility to God and country and it’s insulting to me personally as a pikachu red white and blue cause of how bad of trouble my little country is in.

    If Daniels doesn’t run believe me I will have less respect for him than for even the saddest sorriest of the sad sorry lot that does run.

    happyfeet (71628d)

  86. One thing that stung me a bit about Dana’s comment

    “If people can’t resist being pulled into an obvious manipulation to distract on a blog thread, well….”

    was that Paul Ryan just announced his Path to Prosperity and I’m busy trying to take a hysterical birther way too seriously.

    Really, Dana’s right about that, and I guess Dana’s right that the 2016 GOP field is extremely compelling. Just Paul Ryan’s nuts and bolts comprehensive budget is seriously the primary thing we should all be focused on.

    One thing hf and I agree on is Mitch Daniels. It’s not that I think he’s perfect, but he’s a bona fide successful governor with White House experience and a laser like focus on our fiscal disaster. So long as he can explain his foreign policy satisfactorily (like any candidate must), I think he’s a responsible nominee that Obama simply cannot compete against.

    Like DRJ, I have a sentimental interest in Palin, but we need an experienced leader. I hope Daniels can show up to the debates ready to impress conservatives.

    But let’s get real. We rarely get the perfect nominee. W had a lot of experience, but he was soft on a lot of policy issues. If we wind up with Romney or Palin, we still have a shot. While we do need the White House, what matters most is a conservative legislature that passes Ryan’s budget.

    I’m going to send a hand written letter to my representative indicating my support for Ryan’s FY 2012 budget. I hope every Tea Partier can do the same.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  87. “There are a million reasons he won’t be attending a/his second inauguration. A million. ONE MILLION.”

    “The States, the birth cert, deathcare, Labia, ad infinitum.”

    I’m a little confused on the “Labia” issue.

    Is there something about Obambi I don’t know about?

    Dave Surls (f8f178)

  88. Right now, both sides are appealing mainly toward donations, rather than swing voters. So what’s remarkable about the democrats is that they have no red meat! The GOP’s ads are full of red meat

    Democrats don’t believe in red meat. Democrats believe in arugula and seitan.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  89. there’s a friggin’ undisputed newspaper announcement regarding his birth in a Hawaiian paper of the time. […] The notion that his mother/parents wanted to give him a chance to become PotUS — that’s the ONLY notable advantage which “native birth” grants one…

    Bzzzt. Thanks for playing, but if you’d been paying attention to the issue you’d know that Tim McGuire blew this argument out of the water nearly three years ago.

    This doesn’t even begin to prove that he wasn’t born in Hawaii. But your proof that he was fails.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  90. To the Birth Certificate issue. I have had a CT Permit to Carry Pistols and Revolvers since the summer of 1989. Last September when I went to the State Department of Public Safety to renew it I was told that I would have to provide incontrovertable proof via documents that I was a US citizen. I was told that this was a response to a requirement placed by the Feds.
    (And no, a newspaper announcement of my birth in 1964 was not one of the options I was given.)

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  91. There seem to be people who think the mere existence of a certificate means that the thing certified is true. Or that authorities must automatically act as if it were true, even if they suspect it isn’t. Both notions are ridiculous. A fancy certificate is strong evidence that something happened, but it doesn’t prove it. And the less fancy a certificate is, that is to say the less information it provides, the weaker it is as evidence. That’s why a computer-generated “certification of live birth” such as the one Obama produced isn’t terribly convincing; it lacks not only many details that might add plausibility to the story it tells, but also all of the peripheral evidence, such as the handwriting, paper, etc. that a real certificate — or even a certified photocopy of one — would have.

    For the record, my father does not have a birth certificate. But his passport and all his other official documents list a date and place of birth which are both false. And he’s got away with it for over 60 years. So the mere existence of a bit of paper doesn’t impress me all that much.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  92. This is actually related to the post: if you’re going to quote the Underpants Gnomes, do it right. It’s PHASE 1,2,3, not Step 1,2,3.

    Ted (4199e3)

  93. Notice it is only the white guy that seems to disagree? And he is saying – yeah I disagree with Obama, but I trust him…

    Holy crap!

    Steven S. (e5c232)

  94. Democrats believe in arugula and satan.

    Little bit of a typo there. Corrected it fer ya.

    Smock Puppet (c9dcd8)

  95. For the record, my father does not have a birth certificate. But his passport and all his other official documents list a date and place of birth which are both false. And he’s got away with it for over 60 years. So the mere existence of a bit of paper doesn’t impress me all that much.


    Does he know his son is a complete moron? Just askin’.
    If he needs proof, you can just show him your comments in this thread.
    That should be sufficient, unless he’s also a complete moron, which I grant, may be a completely hereditary condition.

    —————————————————————————————————————————————-
    THE NEWSPAPER ACCOUNT HAS NO VALID REASON TO EXIST if he’s not naturally born.
    —————————————————————————————————————————————-
    NONE
    ZIP
    NADA
    NIL

    *** D U H ***

    >>>>>>>>> *** D U H *** <<<<<<<<

    Can you be ANY denser?

    As to why, in the face of that, Obama still refuses to show the long form, I already offered one utterly likely possibility.

    So STFU already, you’re a clueless, brain damaged idiot if you think there’s any valid basis AT ALL for this stupid-ass birther sh**.

    It’s YOU who now needs to show *proof* — got that? PROOF — here to establish even the vaguest argument in favor of doubt.

    ‘Nuff said you retard.

    Smock Puppet (c9dcd8)

  96. Smock Puppet, thanks for ruining it.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  97. The notion that his mother/parents wanted to give him a chance to become PotUS — that’s the ONLY notable advantage which “native birth” grants one…. Wake up: THIS WAS 1959 folks!! There was NO ONE who realized how quickly the whole race thing would actually reverse itself, such that a affluent black man and his family were the subjects of the #1 TV show for several years running by the mid-late 1980s — you can’t do that without the vast majority of people in the nation having no problems with racial equality. Furthermore, his mother was an ultraliberal socialist type, who almost certainly didn’t believe in the least that the USA would be able to reverse racial course that fast. She almost certainly thought a Marxist revolution would be needed to change the structure of things.

    Furthermore, how did she get from Hawaii to Kenya in 1960? Was travel between the two places common? How expensive was it?

    Michael Ejercito (64388b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1084 secs.