improper foundations lead to poor buildings
If you read this blog, you know that I am not Sen. Obama's biggest fan.
Let me count the reasons why, all brought to you courtesy of--who else--Rev. Wright.
B) He's a liar. Descriptions of his "relationship" with his Pastor have changed in depth as the controversy has grown deeper; his statement the other day that Wright is not the man he had known for the past 20 years is in direct opposition to his own writings, where he noted with fondness the initial sermon he heard from Wright that decried a world run by "white greed"; he initially said he was not aware of any statements Wright said that could be considered wrong, although he had called him "controversial" before--only to now admit that he had heard Wright say some pretty amazing stuff; he continually described McCain as advocating "100 years of war", and then like a bully challenged the media when they had the audacity to challenge that claim. Actually, this list goes on and on. . .
C) He's not courageous. In Philadelphia, he was given a chance that every politician would dream about: a massive stage with an opportunity to distance himself from a despicable man while also setting the tenor for the race ahead. Instead, Obama blathered on endlessly, distancing himself from his white Grandmother while saying, in essence, that Wright was the personification of the black church AND the black community. He doubled-down on the hating Wright, daring anyone to make the blatant racism of his spiritual advisor and close friend a campaign issue. That may have taken some chutzpah--but it wasn't courageous.
D) He's a glory hound. "I'm the biggest supporter of (insert cause here) you've ever known" has been uttered so much that it's now a punchline; he takes credit for writing legislation that doesn't even exist yet (as I wrote about in an earlier post).
etc etc etc
But you know what? The thing that really gets me about him is this: What is he doing running for President this year? This man with such a thin legislative record that he has to run on the vacuous "judgement" platform, this man who's policies are so similar to Clinton that their physical differences have no choice but to be thrust into the spotlight, and who is so young that he could EASILY run for President in future years--he thinks he should be President in 2009?
Why?
Wouldn't it have been better for him if Wright, WHO OBAMA HAD TO KNOW WAS A LIABILITY IF HE ISN'T HIMSELF A RACIST, had been given a couple years to live in quiet retirement before Obama sought the national spotlight?
Not to mention, he'd have found time to put Ayers, Rezko, and heavens only knows who else behind him also. Did he really think that Ayers wouldn't come up in this campaign?
Wouldn't it have been better for him to build some kind of a legislative record--or even better, to be a member of a probable (if not for him) Clinton administration?
I mean, there was NO reason for Obama to run this year. Well, no reason except for paragraph D above. . .but even that doesn't explain it.
I just don't get it. And because I don't get it. . .I'm suspicious. (Gee, I guess I'm a typical white person after all!)
And I have been suspicious from the start. And every blunder, every empty refrain, every time he avoids making a record for himself in the Senate--it makes me more suspicious. And more certain that Obama wasn't ready for this stage yet. That's where the article's title comes from: he has no good foundation in legislating, executive activities, or campaigning (and I mean really campaigning)--and all the building his campaign has done for the last year is looking awfully unstable right now because the foundation is crumbling under the weight of his "front-runner" status.
Let me count the reasons why, all brought to you courtesy of--who else--Rev. Wright.
I dislike Sen. Obama as a Presidential candidate because:
A) He's a racist enabler. I don't know if he's actually racist, although some of the things that he said in, say, San Francisco come pretty close to the line. But there is no question now that he--and EVERYBODY who goes to Trinity United and supported the vile Jeremiah Wright by attending his services--enabled that man, perhaps even emboldened that man to spew racist hatred into the ears of the attendees, into the minds of young, impressionable people--and eventually into the cameras, where thankfully his words finally drew proper outrage.
B) He's a liar. Descriptions of his "relationship" with his Pastor have changed in depth as the controversy has grown deeper; his statement the other day that Wright is not the man he had known for the past 20 years is in direct opposition to his own writings, where he noted with fondness the initial sermon he heard from Wright that decried a world run by "white greed"; he initially said he was not aware of any statements Wright said that could be considered wrong, although he had called him "controversial" before--only to now admit that he had heard Wright say some pretty amazing stuff; he continually described McCain as advocating "100 years of war", and then like a bully challenged the media when they had the audacity to challenge that claim. Actually, this list goes on and on. . .
C) He's not courageous. In Philadelphia, he was given a chance that every politician would dream about: a massive stage with an opportunity to distance himself from a despicable man while also setting the tenor for the race ahead. Instead, Obama blathered on endlessly, distancing himself from his white Grandmother while saying, in essence, that Wright was the personification of the black church AND the black community. He doubled-down on the hating Wright, daring anyone to make the blatant racism of his spiritual advisor and close friend a campaign issue. That may have taken some chutzpah--but it wasn't courageous.
D) He's a glory hound. "I'm the biggest supporter of (insert cause here) you've ever known" has been uttered so much that it's now a punchline; he takes credit for writing legislation that doesn't even exist yet (as I wrote about in an earlier post).
etc etc etc
But you know what? The thing that really gets me about him is this: What is he doing running for President this year? This man with such a thin legislative record that he has to run on the vacuous "judgement" platform, this man who's policies are so similar to Clinton that their physical differences have no choice but to be thrust into the spotlight, and who is so young that he could EASILY run for President in future years--he thinks he should be President in 2009?
Why?
Wouldn't it have been better for him if Wright, WHO OBAMA HAD TO KNOW WAS A LIABILITY IF HE ISN'T HIMSELF A RACIST, had been given a couple years to live in quiet retirement before Obama sought the national spotlight?
Not to mention, he'd have found time to put Ayers, Rezko, and heavens only knows who else behind him also. Did he really think that Ayers wouldn't come up in this campaign?
Wouldn't it have been better for him to build some kind of a legislative record--or even better, to be a member of a probable (if not for him) Clinton administration?
I mean, there was NO reason for Obama to run this year. Well, no reason except for paragraph D above. . .but even that doesn't explain it.
I just don't get it. And because I don't get it. . .I'm suspicious. (Gee, I guess I'm a typical white person after all!)
And I have been suspicious from the start. And every blunder, every empty refrain, every time he avoids making a record for himself in the Senate--it makes me more suspicious. And more certain that Obama wasn't ready for this stage yet. That's where the article's title comes from: he has no good foundation in legislating, executive activities, or campaigning (and I mean really campaigning)--and all the building his campaign has done for the last year is looking awfully unstable right now because the foundation is crumbling under the weight of his "front-runner" status.
So why run now?
The mind reels. . .
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home