May 4, 2008

Obama's secret weapon.

I'm embarrassed to admit what a powerful effect this has on me. More here. Or maybe I'm not embarrassed... to be human.

123 comments:

rhhardin said...

It's the K-Mart Checkout Effect.

Some woman has a baby in line, and women move closer. They smile.

Men move away.

Bissage said...

Some human impulses are more benign than others.

PatCA said...

They are a beautiful family.

I hope he does the hard stuff, too, like keeping his kids away from bad influences, ahem.

JohnAnnArbor said...

Hope they're not learning the "audacity of permanent resentment," but based on what their parents have said, I bet they are.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Get hold of yourself, Woman! They're a pretty family. Nothing more.

john said...

Ann, you need to look at the photos again.

Michelle is minding the kids,
she is looking after them,
he is focused on his adoring public,
they are his props,
they will be scooted off stage so he doesn't inadvertantly step on them.

Martin Gale said...

Get hold of yourself, Woman! They're a pretty family. Nothing more.

What she said.

John K. said...

Yes, indeed. I've said it before and I'll say it again: to the extent "family values" is an issue that matters to Americans, at least Obama seems to represent (so far -- he's still young) those values in his personal life far better than either Billary! or Mc-dump-old-bag-who-stood-by-me-and-advocated-for-me-during-POW-experience-for-hot-rich-new-young-trophy-wife-with-Mafia-connections, even though Obama's voting record has been about as pro-choice as you can get. And think about it -- a President doesn't have the opportunity to affect directly legislation on "family values" issues nearly as much as he or she affects foreign policy. The "pro-life" (and pro-limited government and pro-federalism) crowd should vote for the candidate who appears most anti-war, because war-mongering is profoundly anti-life and anti-freedom, and Obama appears to be the least pro-war of the three.

Disclaimer: I think Obama is a fascist, although no more of one than the other two, and my principles do not allow me to vote for any of them, or indeed anybody (except perhaps for local elections, where democracy actually has a chance of having some meaning). But at least Obama's brand of fascism appears more likely to exercise a "preferential option for the poor" rather than a "preferential option for the rich" ... and fascism always and necessarily exercises a preferential option for somebody or some class.

Fritz said...

... and they had to listen to Reverend Wright's poison. Do they attend Chicago public school, NOT! Wake-up Ann, he is a phony. I voted for him in 2004; just say Chief Justice Roberts to remind yourself what he really is, a partisan hack.

Sloanasaurus said...

But at least Obama's brand of fascism appears more likely to exercise a "preferential option for the poor" rather than a "preferential option for the rich"

You mean a preferential option for the mob. Fascism with a smile is still fascism.

john said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rhhardin said...

They haven't shown Obama's Shoe Emporium yet.

john said...

John K -

You forgot to include "McC- carpetbagger".

Otherwise, lighten up and consider voting for the least objectionable person next November. It's all anyone can do. Your protest "nonvote" will not register anywhere.

(John K - sorry about the rudeness in the deleted post. I think I fixed it.)

John K. said...

Sloanasaurus: "You mean a preferential option for the mob. Fascism with a smile is still fascism."

But my point was that this is preferable, or would act as a counterweight, to a "preferential option for the rich," which is what "representative" government by its very nature tends towards.

john said: "Your protest 'nonvote' will not register anywhere except in your own self rightiousness."

I refrain from voting because of my principles, not because of my self-righteousnmess. Basically, I think that the idea that a 51% artificial and manufactured "majority" has the right to lord it over the minority is completely illegitimate, and I don't want to contribute directly to the false aura of legitimacy surrounding that process in the popular mind by participating in that process.

Skyler said...

Yeah, they look wholesome until you remember that she's teaching them to hate their country.

John K. said...

john said: "(John K - sorry about the rudeness in the deleted post. I think I fixed it.)"

No problem, john. I have a pretty thick skin, except it seems when I'm "debating" Revenant.

Spread Eagle ® said...

To me Michelle is about as off-putting as a candidate's spouse can possibly be, maybe even exceeding Tahraysuh. If I were Barack I'd be giving her the Austrian confined quarters treatment.

John K. said...

john:

And acting upon said principles is more important to me than voting for the "lesser evil," especially when weighed against the zero influence my one vote has when thrown in a cauldron of millions of other votes, and when weighed against the consideration that I'm not all that confident that Obama or Hillary or McCain would be all that different.

If McCain or Hillary winds up beating Obama by one vote, then I might come to regret my decision to refrain from voting, but I think the chance of that happening is far less than my chance of being struck by lightning within the next hour.

bearbee said...

I guess looks matters. The kids are beautiful, but all I see is a Marxist-socialist that wants protectionist policies and wants to take my money to give to somebody else. He knocks Clinton for not offering anything other than feel-good solutions but has yet to offer any hard, realistic solutions to energy or US debt.

Your protest "nonvote" will not register anywhere.

1. I propose protest 'nonvotes' should be allowed registration.

2. A coordinated 'Mickey Mouse' write-in vote would register, would it not?

AlphaLiberal said...

yes they do make a nice family. Cute little girls.

Let's hope, and expect, that the enemies of the father leave the children out of the political battles.

Martin Gale said...

We appear to be growing a strange crop of "cruel neutrals" this year. I blame American Idol.

rightwingprof said...

I somehow doubt that someone who puts family values in sneer quotes has much business judging the family values of candidates.

montana urban legend said...

If that brought you back to seeing Obama in a human light, how about this one - from a culture that actually knows how to put its leaders in their place when it comes to their human vices as well as their virtues.

Highlights at 1:42 and 2:12.

Kirby Olson said...

Lennon's song asks us to imagine a world without religion. "No religion, too."

I hope some day you will join us in world communism.

A strange song for Bill Clinton to be singing. I wonder if people ever actually think about the lyrics of pop songs.

montana urban legend said...

Skyler, let's stop with this canard about Michelle Obama hating her country. She clearly mis-spoke and was referring to the incredibly damaged sense of pride one senses when the country is led by scoundrels and elected on such vacuous principles. Some people require more for their patriotism than nationalism alone and for them principles of governance matters - although I could understand if you can't relate to that concept.

Fen said...

Get hold of yourself, Woman! They're a pretty family. Nothing more.

Echo.

Anastasia's family was "pretty", but for some reason, their people found it necessary to colour the snow with their blood.

Rick Lee said...

It's interesting to me that you said that. I have a client who is a political consultant and I sometimes shoot photos for use in candidates' direct mail brochures. One of the standard images we do is a nice family group... usually in an outdoor setting. It's always a difficult shot to get because kids are kids and it's hard to get all the family members to have a good expression in one shot. Sometimes you have to Photoshop one head from another shot to make the group. Anyway... somebody recently made a comment to me that he had seen one of these brochures and he was mightily impressed by the family photo. He said that he made up his mind right then and there to vote for this candidate because this family photo was prominently featured and he just felt that this was the kind of person he wanted to see in public office. That freaked me out a little bit.

montana urban legend said...

I think in the Middle East - hope and conflict resolution being important themes - the song was more about a sentiment than a political statement, Kirby.

And he says "no religion", not "no god". Even so, atheism is merely a component of communist ideology, not definitionally interchangeable with it.

JohnJEnright said...

Very cute kids!

Fen said...

Hope they're not learning the "audacity of permanent resentment," but based on what their parents have said, I bet they are.

No kidding. As adults, they will call upon their God to "destroy the White enemy" because we are somehow responsible for slavery, racism, infecting blacks with AIDs, etc.

No thanks. I get enough of that from the local Saudi madrassa.

vbspurs said...

Michelle is minding the kids,
she is looking after them,
he is focused on his adoring public,
they are his props,
they will be scooted off stage so he doesn't inadvertantly step on them.


John, your sour grapes are showing. Pull down your dress.

Come on now. This photo is heart-melting. And genuine.

They're a lovely family.

And though yes, what Bissage and Ruth Anne said, but credit where credit is due.

Cheers,
Victoria

John K. said...

rightwingprof said: "I somehow doubt that someone who puts family values in sneer quotes has much business judging the family values of candidates."

You've misjudged me entirely, "prof." I believe strongly in "family values," and the fact that I put those words in quotes was not meant as a sneer at all. I think the family is the most fundamental building block of society, and if it disintegrates civilization disintegrates with it. I do think, however, that the preservation of "family values" depends primarily upon the culture and the society itself, and not the government, whose coercive intervention and influence -- in this area as in so many others -- is almost always baleful.

My failing to hew to the party line of the abominable heresy that is neoconservativism may have led you astray as to my true intentions. I recommend you read anything by Bill Kauffman to help you get up to speed, so that you'll know what you're talking about when you talk about conservativism.

john said...

Victoria,

No, you need to look at the photos again: cute family, great kids, Michelle looking at the kids, Obama looking at the far horizon, at his worshipers. Nothing but props.

Alpha - yes, and lets also hope that the friends of the father leave the kids out of the political battles.

Skyler said...

Montana said,

"Skyler, let's stop with this canard about Michelle Obama hating her country."

It's not a canard in the least. She herself has made many comments in that regard. She and her husband both attended a church that features a minister that (is not very bright) and regularly says how much he hates this country. His political career was launched at the home of a self-professed terrorist couple who have planted bombs and tried to subvert our government through violence.

Yeah, so what is one supposed to conclude? Only an OJ juror can say that they aren't marxists that hate our country.

But at least they aren't the pathological liars that the Clintons are. They only try a little bit to hide their ideology and their true intention to dismantle the last remaining vestige of capitalism that we still have.

Simon said...

Ditto Ruth Anne.

John said...
"I refrain from voting because of my principles, not because of my self-righteousnmess. ... I don't want to contribute directly to the false aura of legitimacy surrounding that process in the popular mind by participating in that process."

John, what do you think self-righteousness means if something other than announcing loudly and repeatedly that you aren't voting for either candidate because your principles don't allow it?

Simon said...

And it's a cheap shot, by the way, to suggest (as I think this post does) that the human reaction is to find a photo moving, with its implicit suggestion that the flipside -- not being moved by photographic evidence that a politician has successfully done something human beings have been doing for hundreds of thousands of years (married and procreated) -- is something less than human.

Martin Gale said...

Come on now. This photo is heart-melting. And genuine.

They're a lovely family.


That settles it, before I have surgery I want to see a photo of the Doctor in a family setting. It's the only way to be sure.

vbspurs said...

Nothing but props.

I have a photo of me, my mother and father on Corcovado mountain in Rio, when I was 5. My mother has her arms entwined around me, and my dad is looking out towards the horizon, with the look of a man who made it all possible.

It's really hard to find out John, all these years, that I was just a prop.

Cheers,
Victoria

rcocean said...

As a conservative, I think Obama would be better for the country than either HRC or McCain.

All three will simply continue the policies of the last 16 years. As shown by the fall of the dollar and the rise in everything the economic chickens are coming home to roost.

But the USA just isn't ready for a black President. And the whole Wright/Ayres thing is tailor made for a Republican swift-boating.

Hillary, you go girl.

John K. said...

Simon:

LOL. You caught me. You're a smart guy, whom I respect. I'm both principled AND self-righteous. What's wrong with that, so long as I don't lose humility re: my own moral shortcomings? But I don't think I go out of my way to announce that I'm not voting for anybody, any more than you make clear as often as the discussion warrants it your Scalia-philia.

Skyler said...

rcocean said,

"And the whole Wright/Ayres thing is tailor made for a Republican swift-boating."

If by swift-boating you mean "educate the people about the enormous and horrible truth about a political candidate's anti-american attitude towards our country," then you're exactly right.

Fen said...

Skyler, I think he was being sarcastic.

rhhardin said...

Skyler, let's stop with this canard about Michelle Obama hating her country.

Ancient TV comedy skit, woman taking her turn to order at a fancy French restaurant,

``And I think I'll have the canard.''

rhhardin said...

With all this talk about swift-boating, does Obama have the hat?

Or is Obama all talk and no hat.

montana urban legend said...

Skyler, you go on believing what you want to believe - in spite of any evidence for it. (Anyone has any clips of Michelle Obama using the terms "hate" or "hatred" in reference? Oh that's right. I thought so). That only makes it easier for you to have to accept that the Obamas can believe what they want to believe in spite of their pastor's statements. But at least you know to not push the "pride in her country" line (despite its not living up to its ideals), which is where we all know the bs "Michelle Obama hates her country" meme originated. And keep up the Marxism talk. It will be a strong year for Republicans to run their spendthrift record on the economy - especially w/the co-author of McCain-Feingold leading the defender-of-capitalism charge. But it seems that's just the structural basis for your "Michelle Obama hates America" line anyway, which is actually kind of funny - almost as funny as it would be to run on it.

vbspurs said...

Or is Obama all talk and no hat.

Kennedy killed the hat.

Cheers,
Victoria

Skyler said...

montana,

1. Obama's wife has made numerous statements to the effect that she has never been proud of her country.

2. This implies that she does not have good feelings for her country.

3. The chuch that she attended for 20 years with her husband features a man who regularly preaches that they should not have pride in their country.

4. The preacher also says that the country should be damned.

5. When you wish that god condemns something, this is saying that you hate it.

6. Obama's wife regularly allowed this man to have close associations with her, her children and her husband.

7. Her husband, Obama himself, has waxed at length about how important this preacher was to his outlook on life.

8. When Obama was planning to run for office the first time, he held his debut party at the home of a couple that think planting bombs to overthrow the government is a good thing, and still wishes that he had done more violence. We can only presume that he hasn't done any killing and maiming of people recently, but that isn't known definitely beyond his wishing that he would.

9. People are judged by many means, but a very good indiator of one's character and ideology is often obtained from examining the company they keep.

10. Obama is married to a woman who hates her country sufficiently that she says she has never been proud of it. He cavorts with terrorists that hate the country so much that they still wish to overthrow it with violence. They attended the church of a man that hates the country so much that he commands his god to damn it.

So what part of this is funny? If we end up with Obama in office, the only people laughing will be the kind of people that fly airplanes into skyscrapers.

Trooper York said...

RH stop molesting chickens and get your cliches right:

"It's all hat and no cattlle."

The proper one for Barry is

"Money talks and bullshit walks."

Follow the money.

Dust Bunny Queen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rcocean said...

Sky,

Thats exactly what I mean.

"Swiftboating" = Telling a truth that damages a political candidate.

Dust Bunny Queen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dust Bunny Queen said...

She clearly mis-spoke and was referring to the incredibly damaged sense of pride one senses when the country is led by scoundrels and elected on such vacuous principles. Some people require more for their patriotism than nationalism alone and for them principles of governance matters - although I could understand if you can't relate to that concept.

Firstly, she didn't 'mis-speak' unless you mean she accidentally revealed her true feelings. Since I don't have ESP or the ability to look into Michelle Obama's inner soul, like you seem to be able to do, I am taking her at her words.

This is the first time in her adult life that she has been proud of her country. Period. Why she has never been proud before, we can only speculate the same way you are speculating what her super secret meaning is.

And, yes they are cute kids. I just hope they don't have the -sour self serving everyone owes me a living because my skin is this color..oh and I am so much better than you dumb bigoyed hicks in the rural sticks- attitude that their parent's seem to have

Kirby Olson said...

The Montana Urban Legend says that Lennon's song Imagine (to which he linked) was not necessarily anti-God nor was it pro-communist. Again, I don't think he's read the lyrics.

Here they are, with a few notes to clue in the Urban Legend:

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky

[NB: Above us ONLY sky. I.E., No GOD.]

[I cut ten lines here.]

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

[Urban Legend: if this isn't communism, then I'm not sure what you could call it. NO POSSESSIONS. This means that the STATE owns everything, and distributes it as they see fit. It's very funny to thnk of John lennon, one of the world's richest men at the time, who was married to one of Japan's richest women, actually meaning this rather than simply trying to get more money...]

At any rate, I enjoyed the link very much, so thanks for sending it through. Clinton was great in the vid, but again I think it's a communist sing-along that champions communal property ownership, as well as atheism:

"No hell below us, above us only sky."

How much more clear does anything need to be?

Paul Zrimsek said...

It's not a canard to say that Michelle Obama hates America, merely an overstatement. See, it's not that she hates us; it's just that we're a continual disappointment to her. She's not Ahmadinejad, she's Mommie Dearest.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Paul Zrimsek: NO WIRE HANGERS!!

Simon said...

John - nothing wrong with it, as such, it was just a rather funny juxtaposition in your comment. :)

Kirby Olson said...

The kids are of course very cute but they don't need their dad to become president to have a very positive future.

McCain also has a nice looking family, and his daughter is a blogger.

Do Obama's kids blog?

Even Chelsea's starting to look a little better these days.

john said...

Continuing OT/

"And no religion TOO." Why, after 30+ years does that grate more than a hundred fingernails scraping a blackboard?

I don't care what it means, or what it ever meant. That song needs to finally go away. Please.

Joan said...

The conversation about "Imagine" baffles me. From Rolling Stone:
Lennon himself described "Imagine" as "virtually the Communist Manifesto, even though I am not particularly a communist and I do not belong to any movement. . . . But because it is sugar-coated, it is accepted."

When the author himself describes his work as the Communist Manifesto, I think we have to take him at his word.

The Obamas are a handsome family, but I worry about those girls having listened to the gospel of Rev. Wright their entire lives.

Aaron said...

Yeah, he brings them into the light just as he's going down. They're props to distract people from Wright, Ayers, etc..

bearbee said...

I don't care what it means, or what it ever meant. That song needs to finally go away. Please.

Agree. It is nauseating tripe.

rishigajria said...

"I'm embarrassed to admit what a powerful effect this has on me."

Its got to be the motherly instinct.

mcg said...

Can we toss "What's Goin' On" into that bin too?

Allan said...

Proof again that women think with their hormones.

tomb1 said...

Yes Ann, I agree. Barack seems to be a good family man, and that's wonderful. Amazing what that will do for your impression of him. He's certainly much more likable. (That's exactly what my wife thought of Mel Gibson until we learned better.)

I'm drawn to him by things like this. Other things being equal, I'd vote for the more likable person, the good family man. That's a natural reaction from someone (me, and it seems, you too) who admires parents trying their best for their children.

But then I consider his politics, and this starts to offset his likability for me. It's then that I realize that other things are not equal.

If elected, this good family man will definitely appoint bad justices to the Supreme Court. He will definitely raise taxes for all taxpayers, and will use that tax money for more government programs that I think are counter-productive. He will definitely pander to the Democratic Party's interest groups and implement policies that I think are bad for our society as a whole. He will likely pursue policies at home and abroad that will weaken our country's defenses and put us in danger.

So I like him as a person and father, but cannot vote for him as President. But I wish him the best in raising his kids and his career in the Senate, and I hold him no ill will. If the majority of the country wants to elect him President, I will support him and hope he makes America a better place.

Rubin said...

Wait a second. This is pretty much the first time these kids have appeared. You criticize them as props and Obama as a phony. But Clinton's whole image is a prop-- she clearly will say anything and presumably do anything to acquire power. It's unclear whether an election victory endorses her generally unprincipled approach to politics as a source of personal power or any clear principles of governance. She also seems to have a deep need, similar to George Bush's need to show himself more manly than his father, to demonstrate that she "has balls." I'm generally suspicious of people who play act at toughness.

The upshot is that you favor Clinton because you think her phoniness is more efficacious in the general election, though Obama has clearly decided not to go a route that the Republicans will certainly feel less shy about when the time comes. (Monica Lewinsky, Whitewater, Vince Foster-- let's see if Richard Mellon Scaife can put the genie back in that bottle, her fugitive fundraiser, her actual stand on gun control) The clinton's never held a principle they wouldn't betray to maintain their hold on power and their manic sense of victimization.

Sloanasaurus said...

I know it has become cliche to compare this coming election to 1912. But 1912 is a very good comparison. The country is in a left wing mood so we have two candidates, Mccain and Obama who are willing (as John K stated above) to bring more fascism to the population.

The only difference is that Obama is both an appeaser and is more likely to reject American traditions. As such, Obama's fascism will likely be more harmful to our liberties than anything McCain or Clinton would bring.

George said...

I understand that Tricia and Julie are not on speaking terms these days.

Remember how dutifully they behaved in 1974, especially Tricia?

Very admirable.

franglosaxon said...

When will McCain denounce and reject Pator Hagee and G. Gordon Liddy? If he fails to do so he is showing his anti-american stripes.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0504chapmanmay04,0,6238795.column

Chris (R-NY) said...

The first family of Socialism

Reliapundit said...

can wrists/forearms get any thinner than mrs. obama's!?!?

the arms of a woman who hasn't done a lick of work her whole effin life.

nothing but complain.

i wonder: WHERE DOES THIS FAMILY STAND ON SLAVERY REPARATIONS?

Sloanasaurus said...

McCain has already denounced Hagee. It doesn't matter though. McCain didn't sit in curch for 20 years listening to Hagee's anti-Catholic tirades (if Hagee made such tirades). Compare/Contrast to Obama who did sit for 20 years cheering on the reverend wright.

M. Simon said...

I hope Barack and Michelle teach them about Black Enslavement Theology before they grow up.

james said...

I wonder what they learned at Sunday School.

The Black Value System of avoiding the Middle Class Value System that such photos (and Michelle's complaints about the costs she bears) embody?

How to consistently have two standards? One for people like themselves and another for guys like McCain, one for people who go to a racial-based church for 20 years and another for people who were endorsed by some random racialist pastor once?

That all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding they're oppressed sharecroppers kept down by Rich White People. They and their pastor both forced to live in hovels while peeps like me lord it over them on E-5 pay?

That they live in a cruel, mean society?

That when they grow up they should avoid careers in the private sector and instead insure that when they grow up they do like mommy and daddy, and live as diversity aparactciks and community grievance mongers, shaking down productive people for their money?

Martin Gale said...

Ok, ok, ok, he’s got a nice family. Therefore,

a.) Marxism isn’t so bad.
b.) Blowing up government buildings isn’t so bad, provided you don’t kill anyone and later embrace Marxist educational principles (see a.).
c.) Maybe AIDS is a government plot. (Ever think of that?)
d.) 911? We totally had it coming, even if it was an inside job.
e.) Obama has known Rev. Wright 2 or 3 times as long as he’s known his kids. (Inevitably, someone will photoshop a cute-as-a-button picture of Obama sitting on the Rev's lap.)
f.) Non sequiturs, the missing campaign element?
g.) Obama is a normalist bigot who uses a campaign photo to marginalize non-traditional families.
h.) Upon further reflection, Althouse is not really embarrassed, but she ought to be.
i.) Just like that picture in LIFE magazine of John, Jackie, Caroline, and John-John. (Well, 3 out of 4 ain't bad.)
j.) The latest irrelevant intrusion of 60's nostalgia into the present. (Die, boomers, die!)
k.) None of the above.

M. Simon said...

Montana,

I have the perfect solution for the Israel-Palestine problem. Split the differences.

The Palestinians get to kill half the Jews. The Jews get half the land.

What could be fairer?

ted said...

Perhaps McCain can use his children also. All he has to do is put on stage his beautiful adopted daughter and the story of how she became part of his family will tell you exactly what kind of man he is.

Forget about decorated war hero, this is the story that will break the gender gap wide open. Period.

On a lesser note, Michelle Obama is something to fear having the ear of the POTUS.

Lindsey said...

It's bizarre the way she is holding onto her eldest daughter in both pictures. I can't decide if it's controlling or she's afraid the child will start doing cartwheels. I'm siding with controlling as Michelle seems to be just that.

Skyler said...

Matin Gale, I think you left out a few steps.

l. Win the election
m. ?
n. Profit!

reader_iam said...

Proof again that women think with their hormones.

Proof again that men react with their pricks.

TROBlog said...

Got to this part late so someone else has probably said this but . . . one wonders if her daughters are a mean and cynical and bitter as she is? And anti-American and racist as Wright?

I don't see this helping . . . . it only reminds people he had them sitting in the pew with him every Sunday.

Simon said...

I really think that suggestions that Bush/Obama/McCain/&c are "fascists" - seen above, among other places - are really difficult to square with the assumption one wants to start from that the writers have basic familiarity with what fascism involves, conceptually and historically. With all due respect, this is the sort of paranoid overstatement best left to the left. That a candidate isn't a libertarian or liberal doesn't make them a fascist.

Reliapundit said...
"i wonder: WHERE DOES THIS FAMILY STAND ON SLAVERY REPARATIONS?"


I know what his position ought to be. In Philadelphia, Obama dismissed a question about his relationship with Bill Ayers, saying that "the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values, doesn't make much sense...." Once Obama claims that Ayers' actions four decades ago when Obama was a child has no relevance to Obama's association with him today, I see no way that he can make the claim that detestable acts that ended a century and a half ago, when no American alive today was drawing breath, can possibly produce an ongoing guilt or debt. The issue of reparations for slavery - assuming arguendo that it ever existed - died with the last person actually enslaved and the last person to own slaves. "Individuals who have been wronged by unlawful racial discrimination should be made whole; but under our Constitution there can be no such thing as either a creditor or a debtor race. That concept is alien to the Constitution's focus upon the individual."

Chuck Pelto said...

TO: Althouse
RE: Sooooo....

"I'm embarrassed to admit what a powerful effect this has on me." -- Althouse

...what is the 'effect' that is 'embarrassing' to you?

Regards,

Chuck(le}

Chuck Pelto said...

P.S. Is it the concept of 'family'? Or the concept of 'children'?

Is it something that—genetically speaking—trips-up rational thought?

Are you providing a case for taking back Womens' 'Right' to vote?

franglosaxon said...

The politics of association are bunk. All the candidates are public servants who should be judged on their plans for governing and the likelihood they will accomplish what they say they will.

If some of you harping on Wright/Ayers disagree, please explain to me why John McCain's friendship with G. Gordon Liddy is not a problem for him.

Liddy
1)planned the murder of a newspaper columnist
2)called for the listeners of his radio show to shoot ATF agents in the head and genitals
3)is a convicted felon
4)is unrepentant for all of the above

So should we assume John McCain will encourage the murder of federal agents when he is president?

(I think no, but there is a double standard at work here.)

tom swift said...

Two daughters, and that loudmouth nut-buster wife. Poor bastard.

That's no reason to vote for him, though.

montana urban legend said...

DBQ:

I'll conclude that your admission of not having ESP means that you're as removed from being an authority on the personal meaning of her words as you are from an authority on interpreting them in anothing other than a vaccuum - where context does not exist.

Adult life means that she felt pride in her country at one point. Something changed. I'm glad you would have us assume that change to have been her feelings on what America's about or what patriotism is about (and that's a generous interpretation of what you must mean - especially seeing as how you're not clarifying that here) rather than her feelings on whether it was living up to its ideals - which is what most people would mean were they to say such a thing. So you can go ahead assuming that Obama is somehow more nefarious than most Americans, or that she is disposed to "hating" her country, as others proclaim. But either way, I'll wait for an interpretation from you that proves that you base it on an ability to read - an ability which is betrayed when you use the phrase "adult life" in one sentence and then say "Why she has never been proud before," as if one's childhood is compatible with the word "never", which means that it did not ever exist. I'm assuming the existence of Michelle Obama's childhood is not in doubt, and not, as you say, a "secret existence". But perhaps here again, I assume too much.

Joan, whether or not Lennon meant "Imagine" as a Communist manifesto, doesn't impact on whether the lyrics or song can be interpreted any other way. As it stands, I don't think that Kirby would be happy to acknowledge the likelihood that Lennon was probably no more a fan of the same "state" that he deems a requirement in his interpretation of the song than he was of religion. In any event, no heaven doesn't mean atheism. Atheism means no god. Anyone ever heard of pantheism? There are non-atheist alternatives to being without heaven, or without religion, although I realize I might be impinging on some very limited worldviews here by suggesting such a thing.

I think I'm in over my head trying to convince Skyler that slippery slope arguments leading to the conclusion that Michelle Obama hates America and her husband's presidency will be a terrorist victory are bogus hyperbole. But hey, he's the one who has to convince the American people of it. That's what I'm laughing at, the notion that he could do so. As I am at his abandoned argument that you can judge one's sense of American patriotism by one's commitment
to capitalism.

Chris (R-NY) said...

It's almost scary knowing that a Marxist might be running our country, Obama is like Jimmy Carter without the crazy brother.

montana urban legend said...

Oh, and nice job to anyone sill hammering on about Wright while letting this guy off the hook. But we should assume there's no racist double-standard in doing so, right? I know. I get the script.

Skyler said...

Frang, there is no need to defend McCain just because Obama is so bad. No one said that both aren't bad.

But what you call "politics of association" is all we can go on to determine what Obama's intentions are. Anyone can say they love apple pie and America, but when all the people around a man, the people who mean the most to him, say they hate America, then why shouldn't we believe their opinions are shared by him?

That is, if an insane Dr. Eeevil were to run for president, he would never say his goal was to use laser equipped sharks to destroy civilization. He'd say he wanted to bring "change" or some other such words.

Clearly, many people believe this man with no portfolio to speak of. I intend to judge him by his past writings and statements, and by the company he keeps. His honeyed words today mean little to nothing because they are by design only meant to get him in office and thus we cannot rely on their veracity.

vbspurs said...

Proof again that men react with their pricks.

DILDOS, RIA, dildos!

Ted wrote:

On a lesser note, Michelle Obama is something to fear having the ear of the POTUS.

One of the biggest differences between Lefties and Righties, or those who lean that way, is how they perceive Michelle Obama.

I think I'd rather have Teresa Heinz Kerry sharing the top office, than Michelle Obama, actually, and I never ever thought I'd think that.

But whenever I go to the black blogs (and I discovered a very interesting one centering around black middle-class issues, called Jack and Jill Politics, named after the famous upper-middle class networking organisation for black kids), I find their comments are complimentary to an unbelievable degree about Michelle Obama -- so much so, that I believe there's something much more at work there, than just admiration. Perhaps projection, and certainly wish-fullfillment.

Check it out:

"I luv Michelle. Do not trifle w/ her! And, just what kinda person does she demonstrate, speak, emote, and breathe?

Oh, the feeling of "to be real.""


And.

"Back to Michelle ...

She's the woman I want my sons to marry. She's the woman I want my daughters to emulate."


Some of the blog commenters there didn't all agree about the Rev. Wright situation (some were irate), but almost all of them were fawningly pro-Michelle.

I just can't see it. She screams 'angry' to me. And possibly treasonous.

I can take the first. Never the latter.

Cheers,
Victoria

Meade said...

And speaking of hormones and dildos... you get an angry treasonous First Lady in there and I don't care whether it's a constitutionally protected right or not, American men will be having fewer orgasms. That's just simple math.

mockmook said...

rcocean,

HA HA HA!!!!

Yes, you a conservative; YOU crack me up!!!

The only candidate who is advocating anything conservative is McCain:

*Lower spending (restraint of government)
*Conservative judges

The above is not much, but please enlighten me to anything conservative that Obambi is advocating.

And, please explain to me how a "conservative" would consider subjecting the country to a court made up of Obambites.

Fen said...

She's not Ahmadinejad, she's Mommie Dearest.

Mommie Dearest with a racial grudge.

Serr8d said...

Family photos.

They tell us so much about a family's condition, don't they?

Fen said...

franglosaxon: The politics of association are bunk.

Fine by me. But that has nothing to do with his 20-year worship of "a God that participates in the destruction of the White race".

should judged on... the likelihood they will accomplish what they say they will.

Oh, I don't think Obama fans want to go there. Your "post-racial" candidate can't even live up to his current billing. He's a fraud, just like Kerry.

gophermomeh said...

So, you're human. So what. Everyone else that's here, is too, though some sometimes think otherwise.

We all see what we want to see...ain't that the truth? It's about the only thing that is true these days...

vbspurs said...

Serr8d wrote:

They tell us so much about a family's condition, don't they?

I'm out of the loop. Are those the Fritzls?

Guys, I'm a little surprised at the comments about Ann's admission the family photos do something for her.

These don't do anything for me, but you're acting like he's the first politician to ever trot out his family for photo ops.

I agree this part of him should play no role in choosing him as President, but why can't people see a happy family, and a loving dad which until proven otherwise, they seem to be?

Okay, so maybe some think people are influenced by the photos, and they shouldn't be. Maybe it harkens back to this photo, and touches a chord with them.

But is there any need for the snark about Obama the dad?

Cheers,
Victoria

Fen said...

should be judged on their plans for governing and the likelihood they will accomplish what they say they will.

Speaking of that, didn't Pelosi et al offer you guys something about Iraq if you elected them into office? How's that working out? And don't you feel like a total sucker?

And you want us to trust your side's advice on foreign policy during a global asymmetric war?

Fen said...

but why can't people see a happy family, and a loving dad which until proven otherwise, they seem to be?

I see it. But it simply reminds me of the racist filth they've exposed their children to. And makes me wonder what they will become.

rcocean said...

Mock,
So here we go again. Vote for McCain or Puppies will die. Judge-wise, vote for McCain and you'll get another Kennedy, vs. one more Ginsberg - big whoop.

Meanwhile, on immigration, trade, foreign policy, global warming, and social issues McCain will be cutting deals with Ted Kennedy.

Further, elect McCain and you'll get filibuster proof Democrat majorities in 2010. By 2012 the electorate will be so sick of 12 years of Bush-McCain they'll vote for Rev Wright for President.

I'm sick of this short-term thinking.

reoconnot said...

"I'm embarrassed to admit what a powerful effect this has on me."

At least you admit you're embarrassed. And so you should be. It might help if you imagine the children in burkas.

If you think it can't happen wait til he demoralizes the U. S. military and gives al Qaeda an unimaginable boost by letting them off the mat in Iraq.

And John K

Despite your ridiculous self adulation you are delusional when you accuse the United States of warmongering. Helping a nascent democracy establish law and order in the face of terrorist attacks is peacemaking.

And if the peacemakers are withdrawn before peace and order are established the war will continue, not end. So if you want to see a warmonger I suggest you look in the mirror.

William said...

Black Americans have a different narrative of history than whites. I try to read Chomsky or Howard Zinn or Fanon and throw the book down in disgust. Thoughtful blacks read these books and nod in agreement as the scales fall from their eyes. I don't dislike Barack or Michelle, but I think they have a certain unease with certain core American values--and given our history perhaps they should. But I'm not ready to vote for someone who thinks Michael Moore is a great talent. (Even so, their kids look terrific and maybe the next generation will look upon Michael Moore the way we loook upon D W Griffith.) My narrative of American history is that things get better.

Ken said...

Amy Carter was a lovely child. Her father was a terrible President. I'd just as soon history not repeat.

reader_iam said...

Victoria:

The word "dildoes" doesn't have the triple-entendre, and, in any case, my sentence doesn't work without the one to which it was the response.

Regards,

RIA

Serr8d said...

I'm out of the loop. Are those the Fritzls?

Sorry, Victoria, I guess it's been a while.

Family photos. The real story.

GeorgeH said...

Cute kids, but what are they going to be like after a few more years in Rev, Wright's Sunday School?

mockmook said...

rcocean,

Can't you say anything coherent about how Obambi will be better for conservatism than McCain?

No, I guess you can't.

rcocean said...

Mock,

Your "detailed" response is rather atypical for this board. Usually, commentators here are known for their thoughtful posts.

Adios Amigo.

Simon said...

rcocean said...
"Judge-wise, vote for McCain and you'll get another Kennedy, vs. one more Ginsberg - big whoop."

Even if that was an accurate summary (and I don't think it is - look to McCain to nominate someone in the ballpark of Alito), there is a world of difference between Kennedy and Ginsburg. I don't much like Kennedy, but he comes out on the right side more often than not, while in non-unanimous cases, it is very rare - BMW v. Gore / Phillip Morris and Apprendi and its progeny, for example - to find Ginsburg on the right side. There is a lot of difference between nominating Consuelo Callahan and Diane Sykes, but there's a world of difference between nominating either of those versus nominating Harold Koh, for example, or (God help us) Barack Obama.

"Meanwhile, on immigration, trade, foreign policy, global warming, and social issues McCain will be cutting deals with Ted Kennedy."

You keep insisting that McCain's a social liberal without putting on the table any examples. It seems to me that the only example of a social issue where his position might be characterised as "liberal" is ESCR. And as to the other things, those issues are a wash, because Clinton will be just as bad if not worse. Your mindset is stuck in the primaries, RCocean: you need to get past the question of whether McCain's the best Republican to nominate, and get into a general election framework. McCain is the nominee, he's better than either of the democrats, and if you don't think so, not to put too fine a point on it, either you're not paying attention, or you're not a republican (and you're certainly not a conservative).

"Further, elect McCain and you'll get filibuster proof Democrat majorities in 2010. By 2012 the electorate will be so sick of 12 years of Bush-McCain they'll vote for Rev Wright for President."

Doubt it. Not if McCain manages to be the one thing Bush has never been: competent. It's not the policies that the public's objected to (with the exception of privatizing social security), it's the incompetent execution.

peterike said...

I don't get it. Those two girls look like insufferable suburban brats to me. It oozes from their faces. And I seen plenty enough to spot it a mile away. I can only imagine the screeching "I want it NOW!" Verucha Salt episodes that must go on in that household.

whiskey_199 said...

Michelle Obama is saying her husband is boiling mad, about people questioning him about Wright.

But, he wants to hug Ahmadinejad after he nukes Israel, not bomb him. Hillary is too harsh.

Michelle Obama is the gift that keeps on giving. Angry, resentful, fairly stupid, and mouthy. With a huge dose of entitlement and wealth most would envy.

She's Cynthia McKinney with a degree.

And yes, she makes her husband look like a weak, hate-America radical. [Mostly because he is.]

I'm impressed with "Happy Warrior" Hillary. She's really become quite good at politicking. Obambi? Not so much.

former law student said...

I would like to buy a copy of the right-wing distorting lens, so I can see the world as commenters do here. But I don't think it would be good for my mental health:

Michelle Obama said one time, that for the first time in her adult life she was really proud of her country. Here, "really" is used as an intensifier. It does not say anything about her normal level of pride in her country. This reminds me of complimenting women I have known. When, after they've obviously put extra effort into their appearance, I spontaneously commented that they "look really nice today, only the paranoid freak whackos complain "I guess that means I look like dogshit every other day. Next time keep your opinions to yourself. Asshole." Normal women take it as the obvious compliment it is, and thank me. Similarly, people are psycho to conclude, from her one statement spontaneously expressing pride, that Michelle Obama has not continuously been proud of her country.

docweasel said...

Hey Ann:
Consider for a moment that Obama and his wife have been exposing those 2 little girls, for their entire lives, to the execrable Rev. Wright, who weekly emphasizes the perfidy of the white race, its attempt to wipe out blacks with disease, the evilness of America, its horrible sins against the rest of the world, how its run by murderers and terrorists, how the entire white race is set up to "grind down" the black race.

The Obama's seem to be doing everything they can to, contrary to Obama's public utterances, extend the feelings of victimization and, frankly, black bigotry against whites, damaging chances for reconciliation or racial progress, into the next generation.

Far from being touched or moved by the Obama's behaviour toward their daughters, I think there are ample reasons to charge the Obama's with child abuse. They have exposed these beautiful little girl sot the foulest evil ranting by a bigoted old racist WEEKLY their entire lives. Who knows what these girls think, or how they consider their white gramma, (who according to Obama is a racist) let alone the rest of the "evil and greedy" white race.

Think about that when you are gushing over this pretty family portrait.

Fen said...

FormerLawStudent: I would like to buy a copy of the right-wing distorting lens, so I can see the world as commenters do here.

It would be cheaper to just remove the distortion lens you are wearing now.

But I don't think it would be good for my mental health:

Do you want the Blue pill or the Red pill?

Michelle Obama said ONE time, that for the first time in her adult life she was REALLY proud of her country. Here, "really" is used as an intensifier. It does not say anything about her normal level of pride in her country.

Well said. You really thrashed that strawman. Bravo!

*smacks fls on head, knocking out distortion lens*

How does it look now? Better or worse:

Michelle Obama said one time, that FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HER ADULT LIFE she was really proud of her country.

So... that will be $10 for the head smack. Would you like to use your insurance, or just pay in cash?

Fen said...

ObamaLurker thought: That was a setup, scripted. FLS is obviously Fen's SockPuppet Foil.

Nah, he's just playing the Straight Man in this act.

ObamaLurker, we have a special on deprogramming this week. You might want to enroll before the post-convention rush.

Here's a brocure:
Not The Man I Thought He Was
Overcoming the shame of being taken for a ride

Fen said...

* cue Cyrus/Amanda *

Cyrus: Aha! Gotcha! You can't really tell who's lurking out there. Its obvious you are lying.

Fen: Its a hypothetical -

Cyrus: Learn to read a dictionary, idiot. Hypothetical means blah blah blah ad infinitum.

Fen: Regardless, I'm not lying.

Cyrus: I never said you were.

Fen: ........

Kirby Olson said...

Ann posts so often that there's not much time to respond.

The Montana legend argues that most of us here have a simple viewpoint and have never been exposed to things like pantheism.

I would argue that since this is an older person's blog, the problem is actually with the Montana Legend. That is, he's young, and as such, he's busy being confused and drawn off into any and every option, which most of us have already looked at (i.e, pantheism) and rejected.

According to Schopenhauer, pantheism has no ethics.

And this is the reason I rejected it in my early 20s.

It may take some people longer to realize that of all the available options, the best one is not by any means pantheism.

If everything is Godlike, then it is impossible to explain how some things (like Manson or Lenin to say nothing of Lennon) just aren't Godlike (even if they think they are).

At any rate, we've moved way way on, I see, past the divinity of mosquitoes...

former law student said...

who weekly emphasizes the perfidy of the white race, its attempt to wipe out blacks with disease, the evilness of America, its horrible sins against the rest of the world, how its run by murderers and terrorists, how the entire white race is set up to "grind down" the black race.

Another person who thinks twenty years of Wright's sermons amounts to the Fox News highlight reel set on autorepeat. Do these people even go to church, much less Wright's church? The only recurring theme in my pastor's sermons is that the church could use a little more in the collection baskets this week.

montana urban legend said...

Since you're so familiar with pantheism, Kirby, then what's your excuse for not understanding its compatibility with lyrics that ponder an absence of heaven or religion? Dementia? I mean as long as you're going to be an ageist prick endlessly spouting non-sequiturs - this time about the ethical consequences of a specific theology. Which had exactly nothing to do with whether it could fit the song Imagine.

But as long as you're going to continue to obsess on the moral superiority of Near Eastern religion, theists and deists have no better claim to an ethically sound system. They just ascribe catastrophes, illness, etc. to a supernatural entity and thoughtlessly assume those events must have either been deserved (does any pantheist say that inhuman actions, natural or human, are "deserved"?) or part of an inexplicable purpose. Either way, those are convenient ways to justify not having an answer and to promote the sort of arguments from ignorance that you get with ID and other red flags of organized religion's (self-imposed) decreasing relevance. It might be bothersome for some to know there's nothing wrong with an ethics that doesn't demand a reliance on iron-clad, empirically nonsensical theological underpinnings. But not for me.

Maybe it's not that the blog keeps posting. Maybe it's that some make it a point to contribute to the threads in ways that are irrationally indignant and by perpetually responding to arguments that were never made - and with even weaker ones of their own, at that.

David said...

df4150Ann, your comment is, quite surprisingly, pathetic. A picture of a politician waving his kids around in public is something that endears Obama to you? Get a grip, woman. Contrast it with how a real man [if not a real conservative] acts, from the Boston Globe:
-------------------

Asked during an interview this fall about his reluctance to bring attention to his expansive brood, the normally loquacious John McCain, who is unabashed on any number of topics, seemed uncomfortable.

"It's intentional," he said. "I just feel it's inappropriate for us to mention our children. I don't want people to feel that, it's just, I'd like them to have their own lives.

---------------------

Obama's girls are enough of a reason not vote for him. I'm sick of only girls in the white house. We havent had a boy in the white house for decades. Time for a change.

Fen said...

The only recurring theme, in my pastor's sermons is that the church could use a little more in the collection baskets this week.

Yah, mine too. We tend to skip the anti-American propaganda, as well as the Hate-Whitey incitements to riot, and go straight on to spiritual matters.

Chuck Pelto said...

TO: vbspurs
RE: Family Portraits

"I agree this part of him should play no role in choosing him as President, but why can't people see a happy family, and a loving dad which until proven otherwise, they seem to be?" -- vbspurs

I have no problem with Obama showing off his family. I see a 'happy family'.

My 'problem' is not with Obama. It's with why it should sway Althouse. Altering her perception of reality.

Where's Dr. [Instawife] Helen when we REALLY need her?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[I've studied abnormal behavior for years. And I STILL don't understand women. -- Dr. Sigmund Freud; probably at a cocktail party after too much champagne]