Word may finally be getting out to the masses that Barack Obama is no "new politician" or some "unifer." He his a typical do-anything-to-win politician who gets in the dirt with the best of them. CNN has just caught up with the Alice Palmer story chronicled on this blog and other places long ago. Well, welcome to the party CNN!
Some usual critics of Obama, such as the Hot Air blog, say that this is no big deal. It's just enforcing the rules. On the contrary, I see it as using technicalities to run over your competition when you don't think you can otherwise win. It's especially unkind to do so to someone who has been kind to you as Palmer was with Obama. No nice guy he.
But both CNN and Hot Air miss the larger point. Obama dealt dirty REPEATEDLY! Not only with Palmer and the other candidates in the Illinois State Senate races (so that he ran UNOPPOSED!), but also in his U.S. Senate race.
Obama's campaign admitted to working to damage his primary opponent Blair Hull with divorce records, and the evidence points to the same in the general election with Jack Ryan. Hopefully, the mass media will get to researching these stories as well. To give everyone a head start, a summary is provided here.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Police video shows Obama robbing nuns at gunpoint -- Andrew Sullivan see upside
... at least it would improve Obama's standing among anti-Catholics in the South ... ok, so I made this up ... but this one is real: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/05/the-auschwitz-e.html
When it finally comes -- and it will -- Andrew's disillusionment will be quite a site. Will Obama get his "Bush treatment" or "Hillary treatment" is the only question?
When it finally comes -- and it will -- Andrew's disillusionment will be quite a site. Will Obama get his "Bush treatment" or "Hillary treatment" is the only question?
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
The New Hillary Clinton is ...
... Michelle Obama. So what makes Michelle Obama in 2008 so different from Hillary Clinton in 1992 when Bill Clinton ran for President? The answer: nothing. Both are well educated, outspoken women. If anything, Michelle is more outspoken now than Hillary was then.
And then once elected, President Clinton handed over the overhaul of 1/7th of the economy over to his wife ... and she proceeded with the debacle that was health care reform. So the question for Barack Obama is, "What will Michelle do in an Obama White House?" Foreign envoy? Education? Health care?
Or will she stand by her man and bake cookies as Hillary mocked in 1992? Given Michelle's controversial statements, the country deserves to know now.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
A Sychophant Explained
Why is the conservative blogosphere so interested in blogger/pundit Andrew Sullivan’s views and unwavering support for Barack Obama? Others Republicans and conservatives have voiced their support for Obama, yet they get only glancing criticism. I think that the critics remain interested because it is so mystifying that Sullivan, who until the past few years was such a thoughtful and articulate spokesman for gay and conservative views, and his latest opinions seem like they are coming from a different person. In other words, even though he’s become increasingly outside the conservative mainstream, the mainstream can’t explain why this has happened. And since conservative thinkers rarely have major changes in their views, conservatives themselves remain stumped as to what happened to Andrew.
As a gay conservative and long-time reader of Sullivan’s blog, I think that I can shed some light on Andrew’s journey and offer a very plausible explanation of his changed views and support for Obama.
First, a bit of back story on Andrew for Andrew Sullivan was one of the first political bloggers to get popularity and notoriety at the start of the blogging phenonomenon. His unique views as impassioned, well-published, gay conservative drew many to his blog pages. He was a strong supporter of many Bush administration policies – including in the Iraq War.
However, Andrew jumped ship in the build-up to the 2004 Presidential election. While he became increasingly disenchanted with the execution of the Iraq (and eventually came to advocate a pull-out), it was the Bush administration’s support for a Consitutional amendment banning gay marriage that drove him over the edge.
Since that point, Andrew nary has a kind word to say about Bush, the administration, or Republicans in general. He holds his strongest criticism for Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and the President himself.
Then as the 2008 Presidential primary season started, Sullivan became fascinated with Barack Obama. He loves Obama’s generational, racial, and political tonal appeal. Suffice it to say, he buys the Hope, Change, Yes-We-Can stuff hook-line-and-sinker.
Now, Andrew frequently parrots the Obama campaign line to such a point that I wonder if David Axelrod has his fax number. He frequently ends his entries with Obama-ish slogans like “Know hope.”
Every Obama speech is gushed upon. Every Obama gaffe is rationalized and spun to a positive light. He is now a true sychophant.
Conservatives are bemused by Andrew’s progression from conservative to Obama-ite. Some say he never was conservative. Others say he is gay-obsessed. Still others have tried to explain him as over-emotional. All have a point.
But these explanations leave out the core of Andrew Sullivan’s blog – that it is deeply personal. It is a daily dump of whatever is on his mind and in his heart. He has said as much himself on several occasions. So why has Sullivan progressed from Reaganite to Obama-ite? One has to consider Andrew’s personal life.
Now, before I start this, I will admit that I don’t know Andrew (we have never met), but as I have stated above, I have read his blog for some time and he describes much of his personal life there. What follows is just an extrapolation.
One must first know that Andrew has lived for years in Washington, D.C. – a very liberal, Democratic city despite the presence of Republicans in power. To be a (1) conservative, (2) gay, and (3) a supporter of Republican presidents puts oneself in an extreme minority position. I know this because I was one with these same positions as well in D.C. during the same time period as Andrew.
For myself, it meant knowing that almost all of my gay friends and neighbors held political views diametrically opposed to mine. So I largely kept them to myself and hidden from them. For years now, Andrew has had no such luxury. He has been well-known for his public writings for years. I am quite certain that almost all of his friends, neighbors, and acquaintances knew of his politic views. This could not have been easy for him.
Why? Because I know the D.C. gay scene having lived among it for seven years, and it is nothing if not a pit of vipers. Their coldness and self-serving nature is legendary throughout the U.S. gay community. I am quite certain that Andrew was broadly ostracized and likely black-balled for his politics in the 80’s and 90’s. Keeping civil with them – let alone maintaining friends and relationships – could not have been easy.
Then in 2004, when Bush announced his support for the Defense of Marriage Consitutional amendment, I’m sure that the social pressure on Andrew was ratcheted up another notch given his past support for the President. So Andrew, who was soon to be betrothed to a man himself, decided that was it time to dump Bush and, indeed, dump the Republicans.
So, his criticism of the Iraq War increased and soon he had nothing nice to say about the Republicans. I am sympathetic to much of this argument. But why did Andrew not go off and become an independent conservative (like I have done) and instead throw his lot in with the most liberal U.S. Senator and the most left-leaning of all of the main presidential candidates?
First, to become an independent conservative voice would have, by and large, marginalized Sullivan’s voice. Politics have become so polarized that only people who get any listen are those firmly in the left’s Democratic or the right’s Republican camps. Sullivan couldn’t be a Joe Liebermann – after all, he has to make a living. He needs an audience.
So, that explains why he would go over to the left, but why Obama and not Hillary Clinton. Well, simply put, Sullivan hates her. His wrath against her is at least as great as it is for Bush. Why? He decries, not so much the policies of the Clintons, but the tone and style of Clintons – the politics of personal destruction that meant if your not on our side, you must be personally destroyed. Andrew probably felt himself to be on a hit list and likely was seen as the enemy my many in the gay D.C. scene. Again, for him to tolerate this, could not have been easy. So supporting Hillary Clinton was never an option as she was the source of much of his past problems.
That leaves Obama and McCain. And while Sullivan has written many nice things about McCain, they pale in comparison to the glowing things he has said about Obama. To Andrew, Obama represents a fresh start and an end to the Clintons. No more divisiveness. Unity. Know hope. I am quite sure that this is what Andrew wants in his own life.
Now married, Andrew can enjoy personal tranquility among family and friends without the constant pain of being branded a “Bush supporter.” I am certain his new views win almost universal support in his social circle. His life is perhaps better now.
Am I merely hypothesizing? Of course. But a more logical explanation of Andrew Sullivan’s conversion, I have not heard.
Is he selling out his principles for personal tranquility? In many, many ways, yes. But who am I to judge, if that’s the deal he wants to make. What I can criticize is his willingness to try to square the circles of his logic in supporting Obama. They’re often ridiculous and as vacuous as the candidate himself. But I leave detailing of that for other posts.
As a gay conservative and long-time reader of Sullivan’s blog, I think that I can shed some light on Andrew’s journey and offer a very plausible explanation of his changed views and support for Obama.
First, a bit of back story on Andrew for Andrew Sullivan was one of the first political bloggers to get popularity and notoriety at the start of the blogging phenonomenon. His unique views as impassioned, well-published, gay conservative drew many to his blog pages. He was a strong supporter of many Bush administration policies – including in the Iraq War.
However, Andrew jumped ship in the build-up to the 2004 Presidential election. While he became increasingly disenchanted with the execution of the Iraq (and eventually came to advocate a pull-out), it was the Bush administration’s support for a Consitutional amendment banning gay marriage that drove him over the edge.
Since that point, Andrew nary has a kind word to say about Bush, the administration, or Republicans in general. He holds his strongest criticism for Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and the President himself.
Then as the 2008 Presidential primary season started, Sullivan became fascinated with Barack Obama. He loves Obama’s generational, racial, and political tonal appeal. Suffice it to say, he buys the Hope, Change, Yes-We-Can stuff hook-line-and-sinker.
Now, Andrew frequently parrots the Obama campaign line to such a point that I wonder if David Axelrod has his fax number. He frequently ends his entries with Obama-ish slogans like “Know hope.”
Every Obama speech is gushed upon. Every Obama gaffe is rationalized and spun to a positive light. He is now a true sychophant.
Conservatives are bemused by Andrew’s progression from conservative to Obama-ite. Some say he never was conservative. Others say he is gay-obsessed. Still others have tried to explain him as over-emotional. All have a point.
But these explanations leave out the core of Andrew Sullivan’s blog – that it is deeply personal. It is a daily dump of whatever is on his mind and in his heart. He has said as much himself on several occasions. So why has Sullivan progressed from Reaganite to Obama-ite? One has to consider Andrew’s personal life.
Now, before I start this, I will admit that I don’t know Andrew (we have never met), but as I have stated above, I have read his blog for some time and he describes much of his personal life there. What follows is just an extrapolation.
One must first know that Andrew has lived for years in Washington, D.C. – a very liberal, Democratic city despite the presence of Republicans in power. To be a (1) conservative, (2) gay, and (3) a supporter of Republican presidents puts oneself in an extreme minority position. I know this because I was one with these same positions as well in D.C. during the same time period as Andrew.
For myself, it meant knowing that almost all of my gay friends and neighbors held political views diametrically opposed to mine. So I largely kept them to myself and hidden from them. For years now, Andrew has had no such luxury. He has been well-known for his public writings for years. I am quite certain that almost all of his friends, neighbors, and acquaintances knew of his politic views. This could not have been easy for him.
Why? Because I know the D.C. gay scene having lived among it for seven years, and it is nothing if not a pit of vipers. Their coldness and self-serving nature is legendary throughout the U.S. gay community. I am quite certain that Andrew was broadly ostracized and likely black-balled for his politics in the 80’s and 90’s. Keeping civil with them – let alone maintaining friends and relationships – could not have been easy.
Then in 2004, when Bush announced his support for the Defense of Marriage Consitutional amendment, I’m sure that the social pressure on Andrew was ratcheted up another notch given his past support for the President. So Andrew, who was soon to be betrothed to a man himself, decided that was it time to dump Bush and, indeed, dump the Republicans.
So, his criticism of the Iraq War increased and soon he had nothing nice to say about the Republicans. I am sympathetic to much of this argument. But why did Andrew not go off and become an independent conservative (like I have done) and instead throw his lot in with the most liberal U.S. Senator and the most left-leaning of all of the main presidential candidates?
First, to become an independent conservative voice would have, by and large, marginalized Sullivan’s voice. Politics have become so polarized that only people who get any listen are those firmly in the left’s Democratic or the right’s Republican camps. Sullivan couldn’t be a Joe Liebermann – after all, he has to make a living. He needs an audience.
So, that explains why he would go over to the left, but why Obama and not Hillary Clinton. Well, simply put, Sullivan hates her. His wrath against her is at least as great as it is for Bush. Why? He decries, not so much the policies of the Clintons, but the tone and style of Clintons – the politics of personal destruction that meant if your not on our side, you must be personally destroyed. Andrew probably felt himself to be on a hit list and likely was seen as the enemy my many in the gay D.C. scene. Again, for him to tolerate this, could not have been easy. So supporting Hillary Clinton was never an option as she was the source of much of his past problems.
That leaves Obama and McCain. And while Sullivan has written many nice things about McCain, they pale in comparison to the glowing things he has said about Obama. To Andrew, Obama represents a fresh start and an end to the Clintons. No more divisiveness. Unity. Know hope. I am quite sure that this is what Andrew wants in his own life.
Now married, Andrew can enjoy personal tranquility among family and friends without the constant pain of being branded a “Bush supporter.” I am certain his new views win almost universal support in his social circle. His life is perhaps better now.
Am I merely hypothesizing? Of course. But a more logical explanation of Andrew Sullivan’s conversion, I have not heard.
Is he selling out his principles for personal tranquility? In many, many ways, yes. But who am I to judge, if that’s the deal he wants to make. What I can criticize is his willingness to try to square the circles of his logic in supporting Obama. They’re often ridiculous and as vacuous as the candidate himself. But I leave detailing of that for other posts.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)