Thanks Barack For Your Honesty

For video of the following comments, click here.

From Barack Obama:

I am a believer in knowing what you are doing when you apply for a job…If I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket, I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate. Now, there’s some people who might be comfortable doing that, but I’m not one of those people.”

Obama is right about one thing. He is definitely the change candidate. He’s changed his mind on just about everything. Sometimes he even changes his mind in the same freaking speech. Heh! McCain’s campaign should turn that little confession into a commercial and run it 24/7.

HT: race42008.

38 comments:

  1. hbk, 5. August 2008, 15:12

    Then he got to Washington and realized that virtually everyone but Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul were fucked up on some really bad Kool-Aid.

    In any case, according to your own propaganda he was anointed “The Chosen One”. He had no choice, right?

    Look, it’s not just the left that is desperately struggling to restore the rule of law.

    McCain will not do that. Right now, there is much more danger of losing the Republic to the extreme right than the extreme left. It’s time to get off of your ideological high horse and join the true conservatives that are forming an alliance with the left to defeat the neocon monster, before it eats your children. You yourself have said that McCain is no conservative.

     
  2. nedwilliams, 5. August 2008, 15:21

    Obama’s “comfortable” alright. BHO . . . the “H” is for “Hubris.”

     
  3. hbk, 5. August 2008, 15:50

    Glen,

    Look, there are a lot of conservative Democrats nowadays. Bush supporters are comprised of the 23% that are pathological authoritarians and the 5% “haves and have-mores” that Bush calls his base. 28%.

    These neocons think they can invent their own reality. That is not exaggeration. That is the telltale mark of dictators. This shit is straight out of 1984, or Soviet Russia.

    When the curtain comes down, and that may be soon, I promise you won’t care if you are a slave to the right or the left. This underlines the folly of extremism, i.e., insisting that one’s own political ideology necessarily encompasses all virtue.

    It doesn’t bother you that the only weapons available to the McCain campaign are fear, swiftboat style smears, and disinformation? That doesn’t raise red flags for you?

     
  4. glendean, 5. August 2008, 15:57

    You are right. McCain is no conservative. When he gets inaugurated, I will attack him like the Teddy Roosevelt progressive that he is. However, there is a big difference between a progressive and a Marxist.

    As for most of what you said HBK, try getting some sleep.

     
  5. glendean, 5. August 2008, 16:10

    Btw, that Chosen One commercial is pretty awesome.

     
  6. hbk, 5. August 2008, 16:19

    Glen
    I see you are part of the 23%.

     
  7. glendean, 5. August 2008, 16:21

    No, I’m not. I have never approved of Bush. Al Gore and John Kerry convinced me to vote for Bush. Just like in this election, McCain could never convince me to vote for him. It took Barack Obama to do that.

     
  8. hbk, 5. August 2008, 16:26

    Yes, you are.

    You invented your own reality when you called Obama a Marxist.

     
  9. glendean, 5. August 2008, 16:31

    Bullshit. Obama is not a member of an organized Communist Party. But he is most definitely an ideological Marxist. Black liberation theology, Saul Alinsky, wake up HBK. Obama is a demagogue that is hostile to free enterprise.

     
  10. hbk, 5. August 2008, 16:41

    No he’s not. A Henry Wallace progressive, maybe.

    I myself would prefer that Obama “refine his positions” on some economic issues.

    But you are an extremist. There are plenty of true conservatives that understand that restoring the rule of law is the only real issue right now, but they are not 23%ers.

     
  11. nedwilliams, 5. August 2008, 16:47

    Sport, you got me mixed up with someone else.

    Dubya wasn’t/isn’t perfect, but he was better than the other likely hires. Thankfully for you guys, you don’t have to have any qualms. You’ve got the Messiah to vote for this time. Whew!

     
  12. hbk, 5. August 2008, 16:55

    Obama is human. He will make mistakes.

    But there was never a time before he was against torture being a part of public policy.

    Dubya wasn’t/isn’t perfect

    hey, neither was Al Capone.

     
  13. tgirsch, 5. August 2008, 17:10

    The “Obama changes his mind” narrative won’t work, at least not for McCain supporters, because he’s changed his mind on at least as many issues as Obama. Stones, glass houses, etc.

     
  14. tgirsch, 5. August 2008, 17:14

    And Obama a “Marxist?” Really? The problem with such gross exaggerations is that you take the meaning out of the term. If Obama is a “Marxist,” then what do you call somebody who wants to outlaw private property?

    All you accomplish by throwing out such terms is to make yourself look like an extremist.

     
  15. glendean, 5. August 2008, 20:09

    Me an extremist? Thanks

    But Obama is also an extremist. He attended a church for twenty years that adhered to Black Liberation Theology, which is nothing more than a Christian version of Marxism. His mentor as a young man was Frank Marshall, a well known communist. Is Bill Ayers not a Marxist?

    You will surely come back and say “guilt by association, blah, blah, blah”. But do not associations matter? What if John McCain’s mentor growing up was a Klansman? What if he attended a radical racist church for twenty years, admiring the pastor? You don’t call people mentors and associate with people, to the level that Barack has associated with them, without sharing their beliefs.

    You mention doing away with private property. Did Marx not say that an estate tax was the beginning of that? How does Barack feel about the estate tax? Did political correctness not begin with Marxists? Does he not stir up class warfare, demagoguing the commoners against the oil companies? You guys are either stupid or lying? Neither option is good, but with stupid, at least you still get to keep some character.

    There has never been a Presidential candidate this far to the left. Never. This guy makes McGovern look like a conservative. An Obama presidency, if left unchecked, would reshape America and lead to widespread poverty and economic failure. In a few years, those oil companies will be nationalized. The guy is dangerous, a tool of well known socialist George Soros.

     
  16. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 20:12

    Did Marx not say that an estate tax was the beginning of that?

    What rate did Marx propose, and why?

    There has never been a Presidential candidate this far to the left. Never.

    You’re an ahistorical dumbass, then.
    .

     
  17. glendean, 5. August 2008, 20:19

    Who was more far left than this guy, JP? Let me know. I am sure that guy is your hero.

     
  18. glendean, 5. August 2008, 20:24

    Btw, Marx did want to “abolish the rights of inheritance” as a first step in doing away with private property. What’s the estate tax do?

     
  19. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 20:34

    Who was more far left than this guy, JP?

    Jimmy Carter
    Michael Dukakis
    Harry Browne
    John Kerry
    Ralph Nader

    Go ahead. Prove me wrong. You claim Obama’s “more liberal” than anyone, EVAR. Prove it, ’cause we hippies think we can make the case that he’s a goddamned triangulating centrist. But, fuck that. YOU MADE THE CLAIM. PROOF!

    Compare, contrast.
    .

     
  20. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 20:37

    What’s the estate tax do?

    Glen. Lay down the stupid fingers for a minute, and answer one simple question.

    Marx proposed __% as an “inheritance tax.”
    THE MAXIMUM ANY DEMOCRAT EVER proposed __% as an “inheritance tax.”

    Otherwise, fuck you, as well.
    .

     
  21. glendean, 5. August 2008, 20:43

    Marx wrote a book JP. He never proposed any percentage. I really don’t understand how the question pertains to anything.

    Btw, I was talking about Democratic Candidates, and all of those were less liberal than this guy. Yes he triangulates to get votes, and he might even govern that way. But his background, as well as his voting record say something different. I think it says a lot about the state of the Dem party that the last two candidates were the most liberal ever, and the second most liberal ever. They should just rename it the Soros Party.

     
  22. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 20:47

    Marx wrote a book JP. He never proposed any percentage.

    You haven’t actually read Marx, then, is what you’re saying.

    all of those were less liberal than this guy

    I heard you spew that, before now.

    Now, prove it. I say you’re a lying liar.
    .

     
  23. glendean, 5. August 2008, 20:50

    Its an opinion dumbass. You can’t prove it. It’s kind of like me saying, “JP is a dumbass.” It’s an opinion, an opinion shared by many, supported by facts, but it is still just an opinion.

     
  24. glendean, 5. August 2008, 20:52

    Btw, I studied Marx quite thoroughly as an undergrad and found his writings to be pure garbage. I am sure you have read him many times yourself, and can quote him much like a devout Christian can quote the Bible.

     
  25. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 20:55

    Its an opinion dumbass. You can’t prove it.

    If it’s supported by facts, you should be able to make a case that Obama is more liberal than the five candidates I named.

    You, clearly, cannot.
    .

     
  26. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 20:57

    I studied Marx quite thoroughly as an undergrad and found his writings to be pure garbage.

    And you don’t recall his thoughts on an inheritance tax because of this, right? But still, you use support for an inheritance tax as “evidence” than Obama is a Marxist.

    In other words, you’re dumber than home-churned pig shit.
    .

     
  27. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 21:02

    I just want Glen to not look like an inbred idiot who has never read a book when he makes his inane attacks.

    I’m trying to help.
    .

     
  28. glendean, 5. August 2008, 21:02

    JP, pour another shot, pop another downer. Good night.

     
  29. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 21:05

    Glen,

    Come back tomorrow, and delete all your comments here. It works for Rusty!
    .

     
  30. glendean, 5. August 2008, 21:06

    Why would I do that, dumbass?

     
  31. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 21:09

    Why would I do that, dumbass?

    Well, for one, maybe someone in the choir, the kool-aid intoxicated, will look into what you said about Marx and the progressive income tax. And then, they’ll know you speak out of your ass, making you look like a clown.
    .

     
  32. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 21:14

    WHo am I kidding? No kool-aid drinker will do more than take Glen’s word for it, just as Glen takes Michael Savage’s word for it.

    S’ok. We can work around it.
    .

     
  33. glendean, 5. August 2008, 21:21

    So Marx didn’t include the Progressive income tax in his ten planks? So he didn’t mention an end to right of inheritance as one of his ten planks? Oh Lord.

     
  34. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 21:23

    So Marx didn’t include the Progressive income tax in his ten planks? So he didn’t mention an end to right of inheritance as one of his ten planks?

    If he did, you should be able to Google accurate quotes outlining such.
    .

     
  35. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 21:25

    After that, you can compare that to Obama’s quotes, and show CONCLUSIVELY! he is a Marxist!

    :lol:
    .

     
  36. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. August 2008, 21:30

    But, no. You preach to your choir.

    You sing the tune they want to hear, and they believe it.

    I’m happy to have you there, since you’re outnumbered at least 3:1 in the electorate.

    So, stay with that, willya?
    .

     
  37. William, 5. August 2008, 23:41

    The sad thing is that Obama and the new Dem congress will inherit the result of the disaster of the Bush presidency and no matter what happens, the next administration will have such huge challenges, likely only marginal success, some problems may be unsurmountable and the Dems will inevitably get blamed by the Republicans for the damage caused by Bush. It’s what they do best, blame the other side for problems they caused. It will be a long period of repairing the damage, probably longer than one term.

     
  38. hbk, 6. August 2008, 9:16

    Let’s see, Bush says they are only spying on suspected terrorists, yet they need to analyze the domestic calling data of millions of Americans.

    There’s no reason to declare myself an enemy of the State, the State has already taken care of that!

    But I guess allowing American dissidents to be harassed and intimidated is the price you’re willing to pay for “security”. Of course, that could never be a problem for people that make up their own reality.

    Nothing will be repaired unless the American people show the conviction to do whatever it takes it to bring the PNAC junta to justice.

    We’re lucky the Bush presidency was a “disaster”. If they had been more competent we would be in much worse shape right now.

     

Write a comment: