Obama of the Working Class: Their Evil Values Are Just Blankies
Justin Katz
Not unlike other wealthy faux-populists who wish to manipulate poor and working class citizens for their own aggrandizement, Barack Obama apparently thinks that the change that will bring unity will entail an optimistic lunge past some of those wicked security blankets... you know, like religion:
You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
The people need hope; they need handed to them what they could never really achieve on their own (right-wing rhetoric promise what it might). They need to pay their dues and contribute their votes for the benefit of those fortunate few with the brains (and, often, the high salaries) to coordinate their numbers.
ADDENDUM:
By some coincidence, general politics came up as a topic of conversation on the job site today, and somebody (I won't say whom) noted that minorities and others of the Left's harbored special interests (such as inner city residents with children in public school) have not gotten a very good return on their political investments. One might say that they cling to their multiculturalism or socialism or antipathy to people who make something of themselves.
Just sayin'.
Justin,
You demagogue, Obama never said that people "need to pay their dues and contribute their votes for the benefit of those fortunate few with the brains (and, often, the high salaries) to coordinate their numbers." You did.
You interpret his words to your own perverted purpose and lay them at Obama's feet.
As for your citing religious passages, "Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but inwardly ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity."
Clean your own house first you blind guide and hypocrite.
OldTimeLefty
Yeah, see OTL, there are these punctuation marks called "quotation marks" that writers use when they're attributing a specific statement to a person. Otherwise, it should be assumed that the author is overlaying his own view to the statement.
In this context, I was aligning Obama with "other wealthy faux-populists who wish to manipulate poor and working class citizens for their own aggrandizement," many of whom do indeed seek union dues.
But are you saying that Obama isn't arguing that people should/need to vote for him? Or are you denying that voting for a candidate is to his benefit?
P.S. — You're quite the preacher, Richard. Have you thought of contacting Rev. Wright about an opening?
"faux-populist who want to manipulate the poor and the working class citizens"
the NRA,The Catholic Church,The GOP, RIILE, Anchor Rising,KKK, Carcieri/Bush
/Cheney, and other "kook right-wing hate blogs/orgs"
ROMUALD YOU ARE NOW BANED FROM FUTURE COMMENTS AT ANCHOR RISING BY JUSTIN
Obama sounds like an elitist of the Katha Pollitt variety-the veneer is coming off and we're finding out that there are a lot people he doesn't like at all-his wife has a huge chip on her shoulder-they haven't lied outright like Hillary has,but I don't like what I hear them say and I resent the studied little gestures vis a vis the flag pin and the Pledge.I can't believe they didn't buy into Rev.Wright's hateful diatribes because they sat and listened to them for 20 years-why would one do that if not in agreement with the preacher?
The key is to get the Dems. to hurry up and nominate this guy.
The more the American people become acquainted with his true views, the larger Sen. McCain's margin of victory . . .
Keep the microphone turned on, and keep Sen. Obama talking!
When I said that "You interpret his words to your own perverted purpose and lay them at Obama's feet." I meant just that. What you freely assert, i.e. Obama is a faux-populist, I just as freely deny. I say he's not. There is nothing in the Huffington Post article that you cited that says or even implies your wild assertion.
You stand with those who look past 48,000,000 US citizens who lack adequate medical insurance. You look past the millions of US citizens who live below the poverty line. These are some of the reasons that make you a blind guide and hypocrite.
P.S. have you thought about contacting the Reverend Hebbe for an opening?
OldTimeLefty
Obama needs to apologize for...nothing.
It was honest talk to a group of people who've been fed scapegoats and been exploited by the right. Kerry made the mistake of not talking to these people in such straight fashion.
Obama brings a positive message: one can be a person of faith without having to swallow the most harsh portions of the social conservative agenda (look at the way R.I. conservatives have turned on Bishop Tobin when he dared speak against something other than abortion or gays).
"It was honest talk to a group of people who've been fed scapegoats and been exploited by the right."
He was talking to a group of wealthy San Franciscans.
OTL,
On reflection, I have to admit that I've been poking you for the fun of it, which isn't conducive to dialogue or moral health. I apologize.
That said, I remain persuaded that discussion with you is a fruitless undertaking. I don't "look past" those with inadequate access to healthcare or with inadequate resources. I just believe that the solutions put forward on your end are not only not productive, but detrimental to our entire society, not the least its most vulnerable members.
Rhody,
Nobody on the Right is saying that Obama should apologize. We're saying that Americans should decline to make him president.
Justin
Explain how the unseen hand of the market will swoop in and heal the wounds of the underclass when the unseen hand of the market has put them there in the first place. It's like trying to cure cancer by injecting more cancer.
OldTimeLefty
OTL:
Re: Your first post was just plain wrong. You missed the mark. You misunderstood what JK wrote. You don't get it and you didn't get it. Wake up and live.
Be a person of integrity and apologize or relegate yourself to unintelligable and insignificant.
JM
JM
What you freely assert, i.e. that I missed the mark, I just as freely deny.
Your post then gets to name calling, the intellectual equivalent of sticking your tongue and and saying "nyah, nyah, myah".
You have presented no argument. You have refuted yourself.
OldTimeLefty
OldTimeLefty:
I fear you remain in a sea of self-inflicted darkness.
Justin quoted Mr. Obama, closed those quotes and added his own comments.
You wrongly took his (Justin's) comments as a quote from Mr. Obama (who has since apologized for making the statement he did indeed make). At least that's how it sounded to me (and JK). It’s okay to be wrong.
Justin never asserted that Mr. Obama said what he (Justin) said, he did what we (commentators) all do with public sound bites and speeches of opponents we disagree with, he brought them to their logical conclusion. You know that. Why would you assert otherwise?
“So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
This revealing statement says more about what is wrong with Mr. Obama, his candidacy, his team, and his agenda than I could ever hope to articulate myself.
JM
PS. “Your post then gets to name calling…” What names did I call you?
I just find it curious that a man who dumped his wife to marry into the fortune that launched a political career and a woman whose household made $109 million over the past seven years are accusing Obama of being an elitist.
Obama's offense? Giving people the kind of straight talk politicians entirely focused on getting elected "aren't supposed to." The man just doesn't listen to the Bob Schrums, Mark Penns and loaded focus groups of the world, I guess.
Joe Mahn,
You wrote,”You wrongly took his (Justin's) comments as a quote from Mr. Obama...” Where did you get that idea? What I said was that Obama never said that people "need to pay their dues and contribute their votes for the benefit of those fortunate few with the brains (and, often, the high salaries) to coordinate their numbers." The quotes were Justin Katz’, not mine, and certainly not Obama’s. Maybe you should reread the thread very slowly.
You also asked where your post sunk to name calling by asking "What names did I call you?" Reread your own words, you said that I don't get it and I didn't get it. Then you told me to, “Wake up and live.” If that’s not name calling it’s hollow invective. It is the equivalent of attempting to win an argument by sticking your tongue out and saying, nyah, nyah, nyah.
Then you wrote that Justin brought Obama’s words to their “logical conclusion.” They may be Justin’s conclusion, but I don’t see them as logical. In any event they are arguable, but neither you nor he present any argument. You both make unsubstantiated statements.
I think that Rhody said it quite accurately when he said, “Obama's offense? Giving people the kind of straight talk politicians entirely focused on getting elected aren't supposed to.”
OldTimeLefty
The more middle America learns about Barack Obama, the less they will support him.
Just try doing a Google search on:
Barack Obama William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn
Folks, being friends and accepting money from people who try to blow up federal buildings and military facilities, were on the FBI's Top 10 Most Wanted List and only escape lengthy jail terms by getting off on a technicality won't play well in Peoria, even if it did play well in the wealthy People's Republic of Hyde Park.
I suppose it's because of things like this that Hillary says she knows Obama can't win a general election.
Unfortunately for her, Democrat primaries aren't decided by middle America!
"Obama's offense? Giving people the kind of straight talk politicians entirely focused on getting elected aren't supposed to."
Uh huh. Except that he wasn't "talking truth to power", he was "talking truth to voter". You know, the people whose support he is seeking? Not sure that insulting them was the way to go.
Also, would this Honesty Admiration Society of RI have sprung up if the Republican candidate had said the same thing? Or would the reaction have been more along the lines of what's-her-name's to Obama: that McCain was out of touch by characterizing the people that way?
Funny, I haven't heard any of the people Obama was talking about complaining about this (and don't say the media haven't been looking for them). the kvetching is all coming from the Clinton and McCain campaigns and the same Washingtoncentric journalists Annie Oakley was whining about being in the tank for Obama.
rhody,
On the contrary, Hillary has opened up a much bigger lead over Obama among Pennsyvlania voters since Obama's comments about small town Pennsylvanians. This indicates that a fairly large number of Pennsylvanians took offense and you can bet Hillary is going to push the issue by showing herself to be the "blue collar Democrat".
And the William Ayers-Bernadette Dohrn connection will back to haunt Obama.
Anthony, I assume you're talking about the poll Powerline's touting (Hillary up 20). But if you looked at their poll last week, it had the race dead even (most polls have Hillary settling in at a high single-digit lead). Any poll that goes from an outlier at one extreme one week to an outlier at the other extreme the next week just doesn't seem credible.
The new Quinnipiac poll today (taken April 9-13) has Hillary up 50-44. Even though Obama's controversial statements came out Friday the 11th, I suspect the number today is actually much closer to the Quinnipiac number than to the Powerline crew's number.
Rasmussen has Clinton up 9, Survey USA has her up 14.
I was comparing the numbers to polls before Obama's comments that showed PA becoming a dead heat.
I'll buy that Clinton is up in the high single digits.
Click here for the new Anchor Rising & Ocean State Current page
About Community Crier
About Engaged Citizen
Justin,
You demagogue, Obama never said that people "need to pay their dues and contribute their votes for the benefit of those fortunate few with the brains (and, often, the high salaries) to coordinate their numbers." You did.
You interpret his words to your own perverted purpose and lay them at Obama's feet.
As for your citing religious passages, "Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but inwardly ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity."
Clean your own house first you blind guide and hypocrite.
Posted by: OldTimeLefty at April 12, 2008 8:11 PMOldTimeLefty
Yeah, see OTL, there are these punctuation marks called "quotation marks" that writers use when they're attributing a specific statement to a person. Otherwise, it should be assumed that the author is overlaying his own view to the statement.
In this context, I was aligning Obama with "other wealthy faux-populists who wish to manipulate poor and working class citizens for their own aggrandizement," many of whom do indeed seek union dues.
But are you saying that Obama isn't arguing that people should/need to vote for him? Or are you denying that voting for a candidate is to his benefit?
P.S. — You're quite the preacher, Richard. Have you thought of contacting Rev. Wright about an opening?
Posted by: Justin Katz at April 12, 2008 8:27 PM"faux-populist who want to manipulate the poor and the working class citizens"
the NRA,The Catholic Church,The GOP, RIILE, Anchor Rising,KKK, Carcieri/Bush
/Cheney, and other "kook right-wing hate blogs/orgs"
ROMUALD YOU ARE NOW BANED FROM FUTURE COMMENTS AT ANCHOR RISING BY JUSTIN
Posted by: Romuald at April 12, 2008 9:27 PMObama sounds like an elitist of the Katha Pollitt variety-the veneer is coming off and we're finding out that there are a lot people he doesn't like at all-his wife has a huge chip on her shoulder-they haven't lied outright like Hillary has,but I don't like what I hear them say and I resent the studied little gestures vis a vis the flag pin and the Pledge.I can't believe they didn't buy into Rev.Wright's hateful diatribes because they sat and listened to them for 20 years-why would one do that if not in agreement with the preacher?
Posted by: joe bernstein at April 12, 2008 9:44 PMThe key is to get the Dems. to hurry up and nominate this guy.
The more the American people become acquainted with his true views, the larger Sen. McCain's margin of victory . . .
Keep the microphone turned on, and keep Sen. Obama talking!
Posted by: brassband at April 12, 2008 10:37 PMWhen I said that "You interpret his words to your own perverted purpose and lay them at Obama's feet." I meant just that. What you freely assert, i.e. Obama is a faux-populist, I just as freely deny. I say he's not. There is nothing in the Huffington Post article that you cited that says or even implies your wild assertion.
You stand with those who look past 48,000,000 US citizens who lack adequate medical insurance. You look past the millions of US citizens who live below the poverty line. These are some of the reasons that make you a blind guide and hypocrite.
P.S. have you thought about contacting the Reverend Hebbe for an opening?
Posted by: OldTimeLefty at April 12, 2008 11:39 PMOldTimeLefty
Obama needs to apologize for...nothing.
Posted by: rhody at April 13, 2008 12:15 AMIt was honest talk to a group of people who've been fed scapegoats and been exploited by the right. Kerry made the mistake of not talking to these people in such straight fashion.
Obama brings a positive message: one can be a person of faith without having to swallow the most harsh portions of the social conservative agenda (look at the way R.I. conservatives have turned on Bishop Tobin when he dared speak against something other than abortion or gays).
"It was honest talk to a group of people who've been fed scapegoats and been exploited by the right."
He was talking to a group of wealthy San Franciscans.
Posted by: Mario at April 13, 2008 2:19 AMOTL,
On reflection, I have to admit that I've been poking you for the fun of it, which isn't conducive to dialogue or moral health. I apologize.
That said, I remain persuaded that discussion with you is a fruitless undertaking. I don't "look past" those with inadequate access to healthcare or with inadequate resources. I just believe that the solutions put forward on your end are not only not productive, but detrimental to our entire society, not the least its most vulnerable members.
Posted by: Justin Katz at April 13, 2008 6:50 AMRhody,
Nobody on the Right is saying that Obama should apologize. We're saying that Americans should decline to make him president.
Posted by: Justin Katz at April 13, 2008 7:33 AMJustin
Posted by: OldTimeLefty at April 13, 2008 8:37 AMExplain how the unseen hand of the market will swoop in and heal the wounds of the underclass when the unseen hand of the market has put them there in the first place. It's like trying to cure cancer by injecting more cancer.
OldTimeLefty
OTL:
Re: Your first post was just plain wrong. You missed the mark. You misunderstood what JK wrote. You don't get it and you didn't get it. Wake up and live.
Be a person of integrity and apologize or relegate yourself to unintelligable and insignificant.
JM
Posted by: Joe Mahn at April 13, 2008 8:43 AMJM
What you freely assert, i.e. that I missed the mark, I just as freely deny.
Your post then gets to name calling, the intellectual equivalent of sticking your tongue and and saying "nyah, nyah, myah".
You have presented no argument. You have refuted yourself.
Posted by: OldTimeLefty at April 13, 2008 12:09 PMOldTimeLefty
OldTimeLefty:
I fear you remain in a sea of self-inflicted darkness.
Justin quoted Mr. Obama, closed those quotes and added his own comments.
You wrongly took his (Justin's) comments as a quote from Mr. Obama (who has since apologized for making the statement he did indeed make). At least that's how it sounded to me (and JK). It’s okay to be wrong.
Justin never asserted that Mr. Obama said what he (Justin) said, he did what we (commentators) all do with public sound bites and speeches of opponents we disagree with, he brought them to their logical conclusion. You know that. Why would you assert otherwise?
“So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
This revealing statement says more about what is wrong with Mr. Obama, his candidacy, his team, and his agenda than I could ever hope to articulate myself.
JM
PS. “Your post then gets to name calling…” What names did I call you?
Posted by: Joe Mahn at April 13, 2008 7:32 PMI just find it curious that a man who dumped his wife to marry into the fortune that launched a political career and a woman whose household made $109 million over the past seven years are accusing Obama of being an elitist.
Posted by: rhody at April 13, 2008 8:26 PMObama's offense? Giving people the kind of straight talk politicians entirely focused on getting elected "aren't supposed to." The man just doesn't listen to the Bob Schrums, Mark Penns and loaded focus groups of the world, I guess.
Joe Mahn,
You wrote,”You wrongly took his (Justin's) comments as a quote from Mr. Obama...” Where did you get that idea? What I said was that Obama never said that people "need to pay their dues and contribute their votes for the benefit of those fortunate few with the brains (and, often, the high salaries) to coordinate their numbers." The quotes were Justin Katz’, not mine, and certainly not Obama’s. Maybe you should reread the thread very slowly.
You also asked where your post sunk to name calling by asking "What names did I call you?" Reread your own words, you said that I don't get it and I didn't get it. Then you told me to, “Wake up and live.” If that’s not name calling it’s hollow invective. It is the equivalent of attempting to win an argument by sticking your tongue out and saying, nyah, nyah, nyah.
Then you wrote that Justin brought Obama’s words to their “logical conclusion.” They may be Justin’s conclusion, but I don’t see them as logical. In any event they are arguable, but neither you nor he present any argument. You both make unsubstantiated statements.
I think that Rhody said it quite accurately when he said, “Obama's offense? Giving people the kind of straight talk politicians entirely focused on getting elected aren't supposed to.”
Posted by: OldTimeLefty at April 13, 2008 9:25 PMOldTimeLefty
The more middle America learns about Barack Obama, the less they will support him.
Just try doing a Google search on:
Barack Obama William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn
Folks, being friends and accepting money from people who try to blow up federal buildings and military facilities, were on the FBI's Top 10 Most Wanted List and only escape lengthy jail terms by getting off on a technicality won't play well in Peoria, even if it did play well in the wealthy People's Republic of Hyde Park.
I suppose it's because of things like this that Hillary says she knows Obama can't win a general election.
Unfortunately for her, Democrat primaries aren't decided by middle America!
Posted by: Anthony at April 14, 2008 4:18 PM"Obama's offense? Giving people the kind of straight talk politicians entirely focused on getting elected aren't supposed to."
Uh huh. Except that he wasn't "talking truth to power", he was "talking truth to voter". You know, the people whose support he is seeking? Not sure that insulting them was the way to go.
Also, would this Honesty Admiration Society of RI have sprung up if the Republican candidate had said the same thing? Or would the reaction have been more along the lines of what's-her-name's to Obama: that McCain was out of touch by characterizing the people that way?
Posted by: Monique at April 14, 2008 7:28 PMFunny, I haven't heard any of the people Obama was talking about complaining about this (and don't say the media haven't been looking for them). the kvetching is all coming from the Clinton and McCain campaigns and the same Washingtoncentric journalists Annie Oakley was whining about being in the tank for Obama.
Posted by: rhody at April 14, 2008 11:26 PMrhody,
On the contrary, Hillary has opened up a much bigger lead over Obama among Pennsyvlania voters since Obama's comments about small town Pennsylvanians. This indicates that a fairly large number of Pennsylvanians took offense and you can bet Hillary is going to push the issue by showing herself to be the "blue collar Democrat".
And the William Ayers-Bernadette Dohrn connection will back to haunt Obama.
Posted by: Anthony at April 15, 2008 6:39 AMAnthony, I assume you're talking about the poll Powerline's touting (Hillary up 20). But if you looked at their poll last week, it had the race dead even (most polls have Hillary settling in at a high single-digit lead). Any poll that goes from an outlier at one extreme one week to an outlier at the other extreme the next week just doesn't seem credible.
Posted by: rhody at April 15, 2008 11:14 AMThe new Quinnipiac poll today (taken April 9-13) has Hillary up 50-44. Even though Obama's controversial statements came out Friday the 11th, I suspect the number today is actually much closer to the Quinnipiac number than to the Powerline crew's number.
Rasmussen has Clinton up 9, Survey USA has her up 14.
I was comparing the numbers to polls before Obama's comments that showed PA becoming a dead heat.
I'll buy that Clinton is up in the high single digits.
Posted by: Anthony at April 15, 2008 1:59 PM