March 1, 2008

And now for a pro-Obama video.

I've given Clinton a tough time today, but please don't think that means I'm promoting anyone else. I'm not. I've been tough on McCain and on Obama — more than once — in the last few days. I write about what happens to come my way, and I hope I'm playing it straight.

In any case, I didn't go looking for this next video. I saw it on the Bloggingheads site. It's an independent pro-Obama video — similar to the "Yes We Can" video of a few weeks ago. But unlike that video, it's quite awful. Have a look:



Chanting the candidate's name? The people in this video are — most of them — swooning and sleepwalking. "I just want this war to end" — they sound like children. Nice, polite, pretty children. Much sweeter than back in the days when I was young and it seemed like a good idea to yell "We want the world and we want now," but just as juvenile.

62 comments:

peter hoh said...

Cringe.

ZPS said...

Hellary! (typo, but I'm keeping it) is appearing on SNL tonight. You east-coasters may have already seen it.

What'd she do?

peter hoh said...

Hillary is on SNL right now.

peter hoh said...

zps, it's live for central and eastern time zones. East-coasters get their late local news at 11:00 instead of 10:00 like us Midwesterners.

Mortimer Brezny said...

She wasn't bad, but she wasn't funny. She wasn't in a sketch, and it looked like her handlers defunned the whole exercise.

1. Have her behind a desk, like a Commander-in-Chief.
2. Allow her to comment on the debate skit.
3. Show her likeableness.
4. Let her say Live from New York.
5. Let her give shout outs to the upcoming primary and caucus states.
6. Let her poke fun at the campaign's travails of late.

And I suspected she'd be shown side-by-side with Poehler.

She wasn't bad. But she wasn't all that great, either. It's a shrug, not really a worthwhile media clip.

Middle Class Guy said...

Clever use of Goerge Lopez and other popular celebrities.

MagicalPat said...

Awful video. The guy should have quit while he was ahead. And the chanting. What children! I agree, they are all like Veruka Salt from Willy Wonka. "I want an oomp-loompa and I want it NOW daddy!"

Meade said...

Hillary: Live! From New York! It's Saturday N... Saturday Ni... Saturday Nnn... IT'S SATURDAY!

Eli Blake said...

People seem to focus on the folks who love Obama.

What they forget is that Obama is a messenger. And just like messengers whose messages people don't like (and therefore despise) the positive feelings people have for Obama are a reflection of his message.

Since 9/11, we've lived in a different America. The optimistic, 'can-do' forward-looking 'city on a hill' that Ronald Reagan talked about has been changed. The 9/11 plotters aimed to change America because they hated freedom, and they very nearly succeeded.

Led by the President of the United States himself, the nation became a panicked crowd of lemmings, dour, angry, paranoid, xenophobic, afraid of anything that might go, 'boo!' in the night.

The United States became a country in which the phrase 'build a wall around the country' went from a caustic figure of speech to a literal reality, where for the first time ever we tortured prisoners, where people came to fear the spy powers of their own government more than ever before, and where we allowed this paranoia to cause us to invade a foreign country which had not attacked us.

We have become a country where fear holds sway. A nation full of pessimism, gloom and foreboding of a darker future, in which the bloody flag of 9/11 is over and over waved in our faces to try and convince us that Big Brother knows best. Bin Laden set out to change America, and he must take great satisfaction in watching the wounded Titan thrashing about blindly as he continues to rebuild and expand his influence in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The opposite of fear is hope. In drawing a distinction with Hillary Clinton in a key debate which really was a watershed moment for many voters, after Clinton had detailed her plans for getting us out of Iraq, a war she had been stampeded into voting for with the rest of the lemmings, Obama said, "I don't just want to get us out of Iraq, I want to change the mindset that got us there in the first place!"

And that is what this is about. We've for half a decade been paralyzed with fear, afraid of the bad guys, and it has led us to do things that America has never done before and that future generations will undoubtedly view as shameful, for there is no other word to describe it.

Barack Obama promises to change all of that. Instead of an America cowering in our closet with our shotgun ready to blast whoever dares to open the door, Obama wants America to once again be a nation that confidently strides into the future, ready to lead by example rather than force.

And a lot of Americans find that vision to be far, far more appealing than the paranoid reactionary vision that has dominated the past several years.

ZPS said...

Meade! LOL.

peter hoh said...

Alert the professor of critical studies! SNL just had a skit in which Ellen Page played Kenan Thompson's step-daughter.

peter hoh said...

The SNL digital short was pretty funny this week. Best moment of the show was Andy Samberg showing up as Diablo Cody during Ellen Page's monologue. Rudy's cameo wasn't too bad, either.

somefeller said...

I've given Clinton a tough time today, but please don't think that means I'm promoting anyone else. I'm not. I've been tough on McCain and on Obama — more than once — in the last few days. I write about what happens to come my way, and I hope I'm playing it straight.

Accusing someone of racism and pointing out that their competitor (or rather, his supporters) has a lame video aren't in any way equivalent. If this was some sort of an attempt at even-handedness or a climbdown from the earlier contretemps, it failed.

B said...

`
`
`
`
Scariest Video EVER.

American's (well, some of the legal ones in the video anyway)literally singing the praises of a political leader?!

Sure, I expect the Islamofascist chants of O-SA-MA, O-SA-MA, or the the forced martial musical cries of FI-DEL, FI-DEL, but here in America?

Sorry, I fear for my children's future at the thought of an Obaman Communist Chinese-style Cultural Revolution that only brings together the socially liberal and
and continues to marginalize the children of conservative and traditionalists.
`
`
`
`
`

amba said...

I don't want to watch this video. Even the still from it looks like a Benetton ad.

Blake said...

Cartman: Yep, that's what I thought. See that? You've got a drum circle in your backyard. [eight hippies are seen seated around a small cmapfire drumming away. Logs are scattered around them]
Elderly Woman: Oh, well they showed up a few days ago, but I didn't think they were hurting anything.
Cartman: Yeah. You know, I had a guy in Jackson county. He had a little drum circle in his backyard. It turned into a drum circle four miles in diameter. You get a few hippies playing drums and next thing you know, you got yourself a colony.
Elderly Woman: Oh dear.
[back inside the house]
Elderly Woman: Oh, well, so, so what do I do?
Cartman: [goes back to rapping the walls, then stops] Well, your attic could be infested so we can fumigate with polymerethane. The drum circle we're gonna have to gas. [raps again. The wall begins to crack and he steps aside. A hippie breaks through and falls to the floor. Cartman says under his breath] Goddamnit! [pulls out a fire extiguisher from his backpack]
Hippie 1: [dazed and confused, coughing] Whoa, how did I get here? Man, I'm so high.
Cartman: Goddamn hippie! [opens fire. Foam spews out from the extinguisher]
Hippie 1: Whoa, dude!
Cartman: Get out of here!
Hippie 1: Not cool! [stands up and looks at Cartman] What's up?! [runs off]
Cartman: Ma'am, I need to clear out your giggling stoners and your drum-cricle hippies RIGHT NOW, or soon they're gonna attract something much worse!
Elderly Woman: Ooooo.what's that?
Cartman: The college know-it-all hippies.

John K. said...

Hey, have you seen this parody of that original pro-Obama video?

Pastafarian said...

Eli --

I have a few questions after reading your very eloquent post:

Wouldn't the analogy of someone cowering in their closet with a shotgun correspond better with isolationists that never wanted to liberate Iraq?

How, exactly, is the liberation of 25 million human beings from a torturing despot cowardly?

Given the choice, would you rather be tortured by Saddam (with a vat of acid and a circular saw), or would you rather be tortured by those that gave "swirlies" to a whopping 3 people for a total of 4 minutes?

If Obama was white, would you feel so strongly about supporting him? Suppose, for example, that he was a very white man with a very white name (like, say, John Edwards). Would this diminish your enthusiasm?

If the answer to this last question was no, then why shouldn't I call you a racist? And if the answer to this last question was yes, then why didn't you (and all of Obama's minions) support Edwards? Edward's actual POLICY POSITIONS (something we once used to evaluate candidates, in the dark pre-Obama times) are identical to Obama, and his still-meager qualifications are superior to Obama's.

George said...

Eli--

You write that "Barack Obama promises to change all of that. Instead of an America cowering in our closet with our shotgun ready to blast whoever dares to open the door, Obama wants America to once again be a nation that confidently strides into the future, ready to lead by example rather than force."

Obama says he wants to devote more resources to winning the war in Afghanistan, and he has no timetable for withdrawal all forces from Iraq, much less combat troops.

Please explain your enthusiasm for Sen. Obama.

titustandue said...

Ryan Phillippe is wicked hot.

I would love to do him.

He is amazing.

This video would of been better if he was shirtless.

The first video was great, now I have to say enough. This is overboard.

Pastafarian said...

Althouse:

OK, now we're to believe that you're not promoting any one candidate. However, apparently you believe that the Clinton campaign:

a) Bothered to shoot all of that footage themselves, rather than using stock footage;

b) Instructed the director to use racist subliminal messages, hoping that this secret wouldn't get out, which would ruin all of their careers;

c) Because they think that maybe, just maybe, subliminal messages aren't just a lot of bunk, and a number of voters large enough to be worth this terrible risk will be swayed, because

d) Whenever any of us see the word fragment "NiG" (or maybe NiC, or NiO), this naturally leads us to think dark (oops, I didn't mean it, I take it back, I mean "negative") thoughts about, who else, Obama.

Now, at one point in your comments, you suggested that you weren't NECESSARILY stating that you believed that this was intentional: You said that maybe this was just a horribly incompetent error on Clinton's part, failing to examine each frame of this footage with a microscope to find any fragments of anything possibly offensive. But then, in a later comment, you called anyone who didn't think that this was intentional "dangerously naive".

I'm sorry, but I'm not buying the notion that you're not promoting any one candidate. Maybe you don't even realize it yourself, but you've fallen under the hypnotic spell of the Church of the Obamessiah.

As you've pointed out here, it's a very seductive sales pitch that they have: Look at all of these attractive young hipsters. Don't you want to be like them? It appeals to our narcissism on so many levels. Look at me -- I support a black guy for president, just like Scarlett Johannsen.

What's he stand for? Hope, and change, and hope for change. Stuff like that.

I wonder how many of his supporters have heard of his latest bill in the senate: He proposes giving a corporate tax break to those corporations that he deems "patriotic"; and in order to qualify as patriotic, among other things, a corporation must pay their employees a certain amount, and they must have a policy of not opposing unionization in any way, even when votes to organize are open ballots (allowing union organizers to note who voted against the union, and intimidate them).

Welcome to the new fascist state of ObamaNation.

knoxwhirled said...

Wouldn't the analogy of someone cowering in their closet with a shotgun correspond better with isolationists that never wanted to liberate Iraq?


Excellent point. I get tired of liberals claiming they are not scared of terrorism, and that the rest of us are just paranoid. Sorry, neither assertion is credible in the wake of 9/11.

Eli, you're one of the most liberal commenters here. Islamic fascism stands to destroy every single thing you hold dear. And Obama's strategy is to snuggle up to people like Ahmadinejad. This viewpoint is frighteningly naive and yes, chickenshit. You don't sit down and chat with people who want to execute gays and jews and put women in birqas.

titustandue said...

There is a great scene in "I Know What You Did Last Summer" where Ryan Phillippe was nude in the shower. That was really hot.

I don't normally like blondes but he is amazing.

titustandue said...

"You don't sit down and chat with people who want to execute gays and jews and put women in birqas"

Completely agree knox but burkas is spelled wrong.

I am a terrible speller but thought you would want to have it correct-hugs.

knoxwhirled said...

thanqs

George said...

Sen. Obama has cultivated the 'feel good' warm-pie-in-the-tummy aura since childhood...as a survival and coping tactic.

"[Shelby] Steele recounts the story of how he dealt with the arrest of a high school buddy for drugs. Obama's (white) mother marched into his room demanding details. According to Obama's own account, he gave her "a reassuring smile, and patted her hand and told her not to worry." This, he wrote, was "usually an effective tactic" because people "were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves… such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn't seem angry all the time.""

Courtesy and a smile won't get you too far as President....

Chip Ahoy said...

*refuses*
*bangs head*

(What, no Jack Nicholson video?)

Yay! It's snowing.

rhhardin said...

the nation became a panicked crowd of lemmings

The people doing anything about 9/11 are professional. The media became the hysterical crowd. As most of the nation has pointed out to them.

Ann Althouse said...

Pastafarian said... "However, apparently you believe that the Clinton campaign: a) Bothered to shoot all of that footage themselves, rather than using stock footage;"

No, in fact I don't. Read my new post. I don't know who originally shot footage of a black child sleeping in pajamas showing the letters "NIG," but the campaign either shot the footage or decided to use the footage, and I don't believe that the letters could competently have gone unnoticed by anyone putting together or approving this commercial. And Hillary Clinton, as she must, says "I approved" at the end. She is responsible.

"b) Instructed the director to use racist subliminal messages, hoping that this secret wouldn't get out, which would ruin all of their careers;"

It's mind-crushingly stupid, but I propose the scenarios in the newer post on Sunday. It happened, so now you're challenged to explain why it happened. You haven't offered anything other than the false notion that the letters aren't there.

Do you seriously think commercials are not reviewed frame by frame? Do you contend the letters aren't there? Please focus on these questions. I've heard your complaints and they fall short.

SGT Ted said...

I saw portions of that video last week. It's way creepy. In a "Dear Leader" thorazine induced trance, drink the poisoned kool-aide way.

Editor said...

Hi Ann,

I Blogged about this as well.

The message I got was, "we're Minorities, You owe us!"

To read more go here:

http://waywardfundamentalist.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/is-there-a-subtle-message-in-the-new-obama-video/

Fen said...

positive feelings people have for Obama are a reflection of his message.

Like that of a cult leader, beyond all reason.

Since 9/11, we've lived in a different America.

Yes, we woke up to the realization that the suicide bombings against the Khobar Towers [1998] and USS Cole [2000] were acts of a long war against the America. And that we need to take them seriously before they get their hands on WMDs.

the nation became a panicked crowd of lemmings, dour, angry, paranoid, xenophobic, afraid of anything that might go, 'boo!' in the night.

What nation do you live in? Some alternate reality? I've been in DC since 9-11 and have not seen this. The nation is led by serious and concerned professionals. What you call "fear" I call responsibility.

The United States became a country in which the phrase 'build a wall around the country' went from a caustic figure of speech to a literal reality

Does Eli have a fence around his house? Locks on his front door? Why? Should this nation try to control its own borders? During war?

where for the first time ever we tortured prisoners

You have to define torture down to get that gem. Would you want a terrorist waterboarded if it would save your family and city? Yes. But you need the righteous superiority that comes with opposition to it. You'll take the high ground and let someone else stain their soul with blood to protect you. Maybe if he's lucky, you'll pardon him...

where [paranoid morons] came to fear the spy powers of their own government more than ever before

/fixed

FISA is not about the government spying on Americans, despite the lunatic ravings of the Left. Its about gathering actionable warfighting intelligence to prevent more attacks on US citizens. If you are talking opium deals with Omar in Pakistan, and the NSA listens in, they can't turn you over to FBI or use any of that info to prosecute.

You haven't lost any rights.

and where we allowed this paranoia to cause us to invade a foreign country which had not attacked us.

A foreign country that violated a cease fire [ratified by the UN Security Council] that was conditional upon Iraq's acceptance of provisions in that resolution. In your alternate reality, when our enemies violate peace treaties, we do what exactly? Talk about Hope and Change? What is the point of "soft" power diplomacy if no one is willing to enforce it?

We have become a country where fear holds sway. A nation full of pessimism, gloom and foreboding of a darker future, in which the bloody flag of 9/11 is over and over waved in our faces to try and convince us that Big Brother knows best.

More hyperbolic bullshit to create the cult leader's narrative.

Bin Laden... must take great satisfaction in watching the wounded Titan thrashing about blindly as he continues to rebuild -

Quite the reverse. OBL is thrashing about in his cave, wondering why his Al Queda operatives in Iraq are requesting desk jobs in the jihad. Osama's failure in Iraq has marginalized radical Islam in the heart of the middle east. As that cascades through the arab street, Bush's decision to liberate Iraq and sheppard in an arab democracy will be justified.

as [OBL] continues to rebuild

BTW Eli, if we're doing so poorly, why does Osama need to rebuild? Your word, not mine.

[...]

Sorry, but this line of bull from Obama supporters is only indicative of a people who refuse to face up to the harsh realities of these times. As Wretchard of Belmont said, they support Obama merely because "he will make it all go away". He is their cult leader.

Fen said...

"I just want this war to end"

Yes, you want to look away and let it happen to someone else. Selfish ignorant bloated american parasites. The war will not end until you are dead or the enemy has been destroyed/co-opted. You almost deserve what you're asking for.

somefeller said...

You don't sit down and chat with people who want to execute gays and jews and put women in birqas.

I guess you haven't noticed that we have been sitting down and chatting with the Saudis for some time, have you? While I have no love or respect for the Iranian government, the fact is that they are a player in that part of the world, and realpolitik dictates that you're going to have to deal with them, even if it's simply a more advanced version of saying "nice doggie" until you find a big rock. As that noted leftist and pacifist Winston Churchill said, "to jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war".

Pastafarian said...

Althouse --

You want my explanation for the "NiG" on the pajamas, instead of my criticism of your explanation? OK, here goes:

A production company produced this stock footage for whoever might purchase it (they probably assumed it would be a home security system company). They put the little boy in pajamas, which they purchased from the clearance bin at the local Old Navy, and they happened to have "Good Night" all over them.

The Clinton campaign purchased this stock footage. They probably liked the fact that the boy was not white; they certainly didn't mind.

Perhaps they poured over every square inch of every frame before using it; this seems an odd thing to do to me, but maybe this is standard practice. So they either didn't notice this (as I would not have noticed part of the word "night"), or they noticed it and assumed that no one would be so paranoid as to see offense in a partially obscured "good night" on some pjs. I'm betting on the former. I'm betting that most people don't think of the word "nigger" when they see an N, an i, and half of a G (or a C, or an O). Particularly when they know that it's actually three-fifths of the word "night".

It's one thing if they'd been PJs that said "FUN WITH TIGGER", and the fabric was folded so that only the N in FUN and only the last 5 letters of Tigger were visible. It's another thing entirely for the N, the i, and half of the G to be visible. Again, you have to actually sit there and figure out that it actually says "NIG". Who would bother to record this ad, and then freeze-frame it and search for imagined offenses? If the Clinton people noticed the "NiG", which I doubt, then I doubt that they thought that it would be noticed.

And I don't think that they were too concerned about being accused of using the ad to plant a subliminal racist message in the mind of the viewer because that's just an idiotic crock of shit. As if viewing "NiC" or "NiG" for a few seconds is going to cause someone to say "Hey, you know what -- Obama's a nigger! I'm not voting for him!" Anyone with that attitude is already voting for David Duke as a write-in. And subliminal messages (a crock, in my uneducated opinion) certainly don't have that sort of power. Although I must admit a compulsion to worship my dark lord, Satan, whenever I listen to Stairway to Heaven. Must...fight...the compulsion to sacrifice virgins...

So, as much as I dislike Hillary Clinton, I think that claiming that this is evidence of incompetence is grossly overblown. And this claim is actually evidence of how much you, Althouse, are in-the-tank for Obama, ever since seeing that first music video.

Again, I'm really disappointed -- I read this blog for your great writing and photography, your interesting choice of topics, but mostly for your usually brilliant logical analysis (despite the fact that I sometimes disagree with your conclusions). I think you're not thinking clearly with respect to Obama at the moment.

Eclecticity said...

Call the Obama commercial "juvenile" if you like. It is probably incredibly powerful and inspirational to a certain demographic, all who will love it and vote for him.

It moved me and an Obama presidency scares the hell out of me.

Fen said...

We talk to the House of Saud only because they have the global economy over a barrel. Allowing Iran to have nukes will only accomplish the same result by a different method.

realpolitik dictates that you're going to have to deal with them, even if it's simply a more advanced version of saying "nice doggie" until you find a big rock.

We've already done the talky-talk thing with Iran. At what point do you draw a line in the sand? Also, I note that Obama favors negotiations without precondition with Iran's leadership, but not with Bin Laden or Al Queda... what's the difference? Is Obama unaware that Iran is currently waging war against our troops in Iraq? Why is he willing to sit with someone like Ahmadinejad, but not Bin Laden? Or would you agree that their are limits to diplomacy?

Winston Churchill said, "to jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war".

And yet, he chose not to do so while Hitler was preparing for war. He knew exactly what he was dealing with and what was coming.

It's Chamberlain the Appeaser who, through "jaw-jaw", gave Hitler more than he could ever hope to win through war.

somefeller said...

Fen - a few points.

I realize we deal with the Saudis because of their power position in the global economy. That's my point. You deal with people who have power, whether they are good people or not, and talking about how we can't or shouldn't talk with people who say or do X, Y or Z evil act is naive at best. Also, nukes or not, Iran already is an important player, by virtue of several things, including their position as an oil producer (just because we don't buy their oil doesn't mean other countries don't) and their activities in Iraq (and wasn't it a great sight to see Ahmadinejad holding hands with the guys we spent blood, treasure and credibility to put into power - sarcasm icon activated?).

As far as when do you draw the line in the sand and go to war, I don't know where exactly that line is, but I will say it's where the US sees that the benefits of war outweigh the costs of war dramatically. That line may never come, and in any case, that line should be based on some sort of foreign policy realism, not half-baked theories of national liberation, whether of the Wilsonian or neoconservative variety, to the extent they differ at all at this point in history.

Obviously there are limits to diplomacy, but I'd suggest we aren't anywhere near that limit yet, and discussions about how we should not talk to Iran or commence bombing Iran are naive at best and utterly irresponsible and destructive to America's national interests at worst.

Mike said...

Half of those morons are too stupid to find the polling place, and the other half will be too busy smoking weed to bother.

Anne C said...

This video scares the heck out of me. Reminds me of those old WWII footages of Nazi Germany. Masses of people blindingly chanting "Heil Hitler!"

There's nothing wrong with supporting your candidate. But to put all your hopes and blind faith in one man (especially a politician)is dangerous.

The really sad part is that I highly doubt these folks in the video (or his supporters)can actually articulate his political platform, have knowledge of his record in both the state and national legislatures, or can name one bill that's he's voted for and has sponsored if questioned.

If you don't understand your candidate, and are only supporting him because it's a fad or it's politically correct, I can't take you seriously and am worried for this country.

Someone once said that people get the government they deserve. If you can't think independently and have to rely on celebrities to tell you who to vote for, you will have proven to be just as superficial, ignorant and irresponsible as they are.

LonewackoDotCom said...

I can't believe I'm responding to Eli Blake's rant, but the "xenophobia" doesn't exist any more than it did before, and the "wall" (actually a fence) he complains about is opposed by virtually all the elites, including both Bush and Obama.

And, Obama is going to continue Bush's policies in the same area, having recently endorsed a Bush scheme (spp.gov). He just wants to bring aboard far-left NGOs and some regular citizens as props.

Just because you're at Althouse's site doesn't mean you have to be as much a lightweight as she is.

Kirk Parker said...

Wow, Eli, sounds like you're the one full of "pessimism, gloom and foreboding".

Cargosquid said...

When you combine the above video with this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl32Y7wDVDs
you see what Obama and his supporters want.

The above video reminds me of "Triumph of the Will." The chanting is cultish. They have FAITH in Obama. This is turning into a religious experience for them.

OldGrouchy said...

The only aspect of this video that's missing is the new Obama salute. Let me suggest it'll be something like extending a person's left arm and shouting at the top of one's lungs "Hale Obama, our Savior!"

Of course, other more discriminating people, might have different ideas about an appropriate salute, perhaps one more casual in nature, using only a finger or two, with a sharp upward thrust!

Ta ta everyone!

Nethaqr said...

It's been a little known fact that the working title of BHO's last book was originally "My Struggle", but was renamed due to some German copyright issues...

Daryl said...

It's funny that they are chanting

"OH-baw-mah, OH-baw-mah"

when the man' last name is

"OH-BAH-mah"

They're more in love with the idea of multiculturalism than with actually being able to pronounce Mr. Hopey Changey's genuinely ethnic name.

Anne C said...

I think the Black Panthers might be amendable and let him borrow their trademark one-fisted salute.

Appropriate, seeming as how Obama can relate to the brotherhood's struggle and all...

Hoosier Daddy said...

Can you say 'cult of personality?'

I'm sure the title of Dear Leader can't be far behind.

Luther McLeod said...

Pastafarian:

Excellent rebuttal to Ann's contention re 'nig'. Highly logicial I think.

Chalons said...

That video was a multicultural disaster.
A couple more like that and the Obama movement will be slain by its own hand - and that would be a very good thing.

Patm said...

The worst part of that unwatchable mess was John Leguizamo shoving his finger in my face and wagging it at me.

If he'd done that to me in real life, I'd have broken it for him. Obnoxious.

Pastafarian said...

Hey. That other Pastafarian isn't me. In case anyone cares.

TROBlog said...

Very creepy video. Obama belongs to the world? Very New World Orderish to me.

Could he be the Anti-Christ?

Nawwww, just teasing.

Still . . .

Fen said...

I'm still trying to figure out why Obama is willing to sit with someone like Ahmadinejad, but not Bin Laden?

Eli Blake said...

Pastafarian (6:48 AM):

The invasion of Iraq was not about saving the people there from Saddam (which is a good thing, because if we thought we had to go invade every country with a murdering despot at the helm our military would be stuck in China, Cuba, Iran, Darfur, Zimbabwe, Myanmar and at least half a dozen other countries.) It was an over-reaction to 9/11 and in fact the irony is that it actually helped the people who were responsible for 9/11 get away with it.

As far as torture, I'm not suggesting that other people don't do it. We know they do. But America is and always has been better than that. The Japanese may have murdered hundreds of American prisoners in the Bataan death march, but we never tortured a single Japanese prisoner. Ditto Nazis, communists and the rest of our enemies (all of which had no problem with torture.) To use the fact that evil people practice torture to excuse American use of torture is to in effect suggest that we are no longer better than they are, just not as bad (if you don't understand the deep difference between 'better' vs. 'not as bad' then I'll explain it to you.)

Further, there are many ways to get rid of an evil dictator. We got rid of the most evil of dictators-- the Soviets, without ever invading the Soviet Union. What we did was show that we were better and had a better way than what they had. And the people themselves got rid of it. Invasion clearly has cost us a great deal (approaching a trillion dollars and 4000 dead and our military bogged down and therefore less able to do its job elsewhere if needed-- five years later and with no end in sight). Some things that we should have tried if getting rid of Saddam was that huge of a priority: diplomacy, supporting internal resistance both inside and outside the regime, covert action; any of these would have cost far less than to invade. To look at war as the only solution is a bit like discovering termites in your home and deciding that the only way to get rid of them is to burn down the house and rebuild it from the foundation up.

As far as John Edwards is concerned, I liked him better when he ran four years ago. At the time he really was the candidate who best embodied optimism and change. But this year his message seemed too angry and too negative to me. I don't get into all that class-warfare stuff, and Obama has made it clear that he intends to unite all of America. You can't do that if you are scapegoating one group of Americans for all our ills. I'm not saying that corporations are never greedy or never should be restrained, but the whole 'corporate greed' thing that Edwards was talking about this year is a turnoff. It doesn't matter whether you are blaming America's ills on corporations, immigrants, homosexuals or whatever other group politicians like to blame, I've never liked the politics of divisiveness-- and Obama doesn't practice them.

Eli Blake said...

george and knoxwhirled:

Obama is smart enough to realize that while we need to get out of Iraq, and our strategy should (unlike the past five years) turn towards that, it would be stupid to put forth a timetable today (especially as candidate Obama) when any discussions on getting out are over a year away. As far as Afghanistan is concerned, most Americans with any common sense realize that George Bush dropped the ball in the region of the world where al-Qaeda is headquartered in order to pursue a fruitless venture in Iraq and we are going to continue to have a real problem in both Afghanistan and Pakistan in the future. No one I know believes we should withdraw from Afghanistan because that is where are real enemies are. We've lost five valuable years in Iraq and now al-Qaeda and the Taliban have reconstituted themselves in both of those countries and are far stronger now than they have been at any time since we invaded Iraq.

knoxgirl: Do I believe that we should sit down and negotiate with people who hate Jews and are anti-woman?

Yes, I do. That doesn't mean we agree with them. 1. we already county Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, for example, as 'allies' and negotiate with them all the time, and 2. Ronald Reagan negotiated with Mikhail Gorbachev, but that didn't mean he supported communism.

Uncle Mikey said...

That may be the single most embarrassing thing I've ever seen Americans do.

The Japanese may have murdered hundreds of American prisoners in the Bataan death march,

Thousands, at least.

but we never tortured a single Japanese prisoner. Ditto Nazis, communists and the rest of our enemies

Please tell me you're joking with this one. Never? Really?

Eli Blake said...

Mikey,

Yes, I am serious. I'm not talking about the occasional GI who may have lost it after seeing his buddies blown apart and beaten up a prisoner, I'm talking about torture as a matter of policy authorized and carried out by people who had orders to do so.

If you have any evidence that the United States has ever before engaged in the torture of enemy prisoners as a matter of policy (certainly since signing the Geneva convention) I'd like to know what it is. Because that has never been who the United States is, or what we do. We won World War II in spite of the Bataan Death March, and we won it without resorting to those kinds of tactics ourselves.

TMSG said...

You can say the military didn't torture military prisoners in the last century.

Can you say the same about the CIA during last century's grey war?

demolition65 said...

Eli Blake: Take an emetic right away and purge yourself of the Kool-Aid you are obviously mainlining.

Eclecticity: That video will appeal only to already-committed Obamaniacs. Anyone with a functioning brain will be simply horrified by that. It will gain nothing.

Simon said...

It always interests me to see the death count brought up as an argument against the war in the middle east.

4,000 people lost over the course of 6 years is certainly nothing to sniff at, and I can see why the anti-war crowd want people to see this. But I wonder how they would react if they knew that in one day at the Battle of Antietam (American Civil War), the Union side alone lost over 12,000 troops. All together, both sides witnessed the deaths of 23,000 individuals. And this was part of a massive, five-year war that was started just to punish the southern states for seceding - the whole slavery thing was just tacked on as an excuse to bolster its popularity later on.

Abraham Lincoln should have stayed out of the South.

<./tongue in cheek>

Deuce Geary said...

I do agree with one statement in it (I believe it was by Jessica Alba): "I want the rest of the world to think highly of our amazing country."

With this, I emphatically agree. but not the way the lovely Miss Alba would have me agree.

I wish the rest of the world would come closer to our values -- not vice versa.

But I also blieve that more of the world is in sync with us than we realize. As Dennis Prager says, "The WORLD doesn't hate America -- the Left around the world hates America."