Powered by TypePad

« Notes From The Reality Based | Main | Krugman Versus The NY Times (And The AP, And More) »

April 11, 2008



Obama has money like water.

Credibility lost cannot be bought back.


He talks like jobs are a constitutional right and the Second Amendment isn't. Doesn't he want his relatives in Africa to have a chance at a decent life like Americans? Or does he believe that economics is a zero-sum game, like most Marxists?

Posted by: AST | April 12, 2008 at 12:44 AM


HUGE swathes of America think like this! HUGE!

Especially in the rust belt.

And they do not vote Republican.

How do you win over people who feel the government owes it to them to attack business and FORCE them to pay them exorbitant wages to too many workers for outmoded work?

Many "welfare queens" work in factories and hate NAFTA.

Now with the dollar falling etc. even more people feel they have a right to "free healthcare" and they are going to vote for their "piece" of the government pie.

How is McCain going to counter this?

We need to get past "Hussein" and start coming up with a winnable strategy.


We need to get past ...

Just enjoying the self inflicted fireworks at this point. The way Obama is going McCain won't need a dime or strategery.


Hint: If I were a "Moby",

Either way nobody is buying the act.

Posted by: boris | April 13, 2008 at 01:38 PM

Obama has money like water.

Credibility lost cannot be bought back.

Posted by: boris | April 13, 2008 at 01:41 PM

1. Who appointed you Lord and Overseer of conservative thought?

You still don't know what a "moby" is. As I said, go tot the LGF dictionary.

2. Money wins elections.

There is no getting around that.

And Obama is breaking Bush's money records!

In the case of Republicans they need even more of a margin so that they can counter not only the candidate, but the media as well.

This is a so-called "Democratic year" (whatever that means) I am dismayed to think that anyone else would think, like you, that this comment will be enough to sink Obama.

If the Wright thing failed to do so, why will it work in a resurrected form SEVEN months from now?

It will not.

A week is a long time in politics.

Outrage is not a strategy.


Who appointed you Lord and Overseer ...

I'm just the piano player.

Rick Ballard

"I'm just the piano player."

Yeah, but you know who gets to run a tab with Aunt Sally and you recognize a false note when you hear one.

Must be all that time at the piano...


Obama is pulling 39% among white democrats.

Kerry held 40% white support in the general and lost.

Does anyone in their right mind think that Obama will fare better among independents and conservatives?

He doesn't get 35% of the white vote in Nov, and I can already envision the columns fom the NYT(if it is still in print) that will tell me how americans are racist.

Posted by: paul | April 12, 2008 at 12:50 AM


1. He's got more than enough "independents".

You underestimate the number of people who believe Obama is "beyond acrimony and dirty politics".

Going up against the Mistress of Sleaze and Lies herself has only helped.

Many an independent has been bedazzled.

2. What conservatives?

The ones who sated home to "punish" the Republicans in 2006?

All conservatives have to do is stay home (as many of the idiotic ones are wont to do). And they are very good at that.

People don't care about gay marriage/abortion this round so some people will have to suck it up and take a back seat (and go out and vote for McCain).

But as we know from 2006, enough conservatives have this silly idea that they are going to "punish" Republican candidates they do not like. Don't expect the Huckabee voters to vote enthusiastically for McCain.

That is all Obama needs to win.

That would be a threat "39%" or not.

They came out for Bush. Will they come out for McCain?


Obama was explaining why middle class PA voters vote against their own economic interests to a group of Marin County voters voting against their own economic interests.

Posted by: MayBee | April 12, 2008 at 01:25 AM


Well put.

Sad but true.

Republicans have not yet won the war of ideas.

If the Democrats win, they will turn on blogs and talk radio. We have to try to get the message out now--not later.


Many an independent has been bedazzled.

And many a moby has been debunked.


"I think a serious split of that party along racial lines is actually going to happen. Live by the sword, die by the sword."

Shakespeare couldn't have written it better.

Posted by: JB | April 12, 2008 at 01:47 AM

Hopefully at the convention.

But Obama has rich white Democrats, the young of any race and African-Americans.

Hillary has poor Whites, Hispanics and the elderly.


Many an independent has been bedazzled.

And many a moby has been debunked.

Posted by: boris | April 13, 2008 at 02:13 PM


You continue to masturbate by yourself...
I gave you enough chances to have an intelligent conversation.

(You'll be voting for McCain in all probability, so evangelism is wasted on you.)


Don't forget ... Obama has the moby.


I gave you enough chances to have an intelligent conversation

If intelligent conversation was my intent it would have to be with someone else. All you offer is alarming stupidity to make fun of.


I keep thinking of Ross Perot, torpedoing himself when, while trying to empathize with a largely black audience, he referred to them as "you people."

For liberals who don't get it: think of this dust-up as "you people" times nine freaking thousand.

Posted by: Mars vs Hollywood | April 12, 2008 at 06:06 AM


If Whites didn't get "you people" back then, why would they now? (x anything?)

They won't.

Let us attack Obama properly. Do people seriously think the election is over now?

Boy are we in trouble!


Boy are we in trouble!

Don't call me "Boy" and yes you are.


Obama has the race riot veto.

1. Obama gets the nod. Hillary voters sulk.
2. Hillary gets the nod. Obama voters hit the streets burn Denver. Never vote for a Democrat again (not all but enough).

Under which scenario would you rather lose an election? Either scenario is bad for down ticket races.

Which scenario promises a quicker recovery?

I think George Soros done broke the Democrat Party. I think it goes something like this: "You bought it. You broke it."

Tough choices.

Posted by: M. Simon | April 12, 2008 at 08:16 AM

Why would Hillary voters sulk and Obama voters riot?

Why not the other way around? Why wouldn't both sulk?

Dear goodness. Where to begin?

Don't turn around and go ape over "Jeremiah" now. That would complete the hypocrisy.

The nomination is not inevitable. Republicans have to work for it. This kind of Neanderthal thinking will not be the ticket to victory by the way.


This kind of Neanderthal thinkin ...

You otta know.





An insidious and specialized type of left-wing troll who visits blogs and impersonates a conservative for the purpose of either spreading false rumors intended to sow dissension among conservative voters, or who purposely posts inflammatory and offensive comments for the purpose of discrediting the blog in question.




Kindly allow me to change two words in something Jay McDonough posted at 9:07 pm:

"Obama asserted Chicago voters are bitter and so simple and lacking in maturity and intelligence that they address their frustration by clinging to primitive and reactionary churches rather than addressing their problems in constructive ways."

Posted by: Curly Smith | April 12, 2008 at 08:27 AM

But he is right. Tis has been the lot of many African-Americans who have lived through the Civil Rights Era.

This explains why such churches exist.

Of course, people like "Wright" (and the Democratic Party) have tried to capitalize on this and stir up fear and mistrust in order to keep African-American votes.

It was the reverse of the Southern Strategy, and is very reprehensible.


When I posted this on this site yesterday, I had found the part ..

anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

.. as just breathe taking in regard to the fact that just the day before Nancy Pelosi had taken the Columbian Free Trade agreement out of contention for an up or down vote.

By why would Nancy Pelosi be bitter ?

But alas, here was the leading contentor for the Democratic nomination for POTUS basically saying that this was a cynical act, probably a cynical political act which was not in the interest of the nation, but nonetheless standard Democratic fare of the day.

Are all Democratic candidates so cynical of the voters that they fell free to distort their own positions publicly while secretly knowing that they would not support it themselves ?

I will watch and wait for an answer.

Posted by: Neo | April 12, 2008 at 08:34 AM

The truth has always been at a premium on the left; and they have no quibbles with abandoning some of their plans temporarily in order to keep votes.

This explains triangulation.

Take for example the people who blame NAFTA for "the jobs going to China and India" (as one Obama listener did a while back).

I am afraid though, that even conservatives are felling down on free trade.
How else could you explain the surge of response towards Huckabee's populist campaign?


They do that a lot over there. Mustn't have dissenting POVs. Wouldn't be prudent.

Posted by: Sue | April 12, 2008 at 09:14 AM

One or two posters here have taken upon themselves that kind of mentality as well. It's unfortunate though.

I would caution you on your previous post though:

Fire on the Mountain would be deemed a racist song. Fire on the mountain, run boy run. You can't say monkey. You can't say boy.

Posted by: Sue | April 12, 2008 at 08:50 AM

Political correctness is good red meat, but to be honest as a conservative, you cannot fly in the face of history like that. Part of being conservative means that we learn from history (which is why we don't go a hankering after demonstrably failed socialist policies and why we can see the hand of statism behind the "climate change" hoax. We can see the patterns.)

I don't know about you, but there just is no pressing need for me to go about calling anyone a "monkey" or a "boy" especially considering the history of that in this country. This is not hundreds of years past, but within the lifetime of the vast majority of Americans alive today--or their direct descendants.

In time this will go away, I believe, as nobody wants to be tied down by ugliness, but I am loath to think that that statement is very funny at all.

The real issue here is trying to wean a large section of the American population off the notion that the government is a piggy bank.

People are beginning to accept this more and more--especially as it pertains to healthcare.
I am not sure many conservatives understand the depth of this feeling.
Ironically, I hope the falling dollar will prevent any such expenditure by government in the near future. That may buy some time, but we will have to see.


Three months ago I thought Obama was a fascinating, charming and perhaps even inspirational guy. Now I've developed a strong dislike and comtempt for the man. He's a fraud.

Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 12, 2008 at 09:44 AM


How many people have NOT followed you?

And to think that you liked him despite his economic policies etc.

Which either means that you accept them (even though you dislike him), or that they were not important to you.


Falling like a rock in the positive/negative questions at Rasmussen. Its a 3 day average so watch for more to some. He will exceed Hills negatives, which make you unelectable in this country, MOBY.


Has he never just sat down with some rural people and talked?

Are you kidding? Do you know what those people do for a living??

In the immortal words of Hillary Clinton. "Why in the f@@k are we going here, there's no money here!!!"

North Illinios, and Southern Illinios might as well be two seperate states. You could chop it just South of Springfield, and you would have one of the most Liberal govt's to the North, and one of the most Rural Conservative govts to the South you've ever seen. Talk about disenfranchised. Rural Illinios voters are constantly disenfranchised by Urban voters. It's at the point now where Blago is cutting funding for 4-H and Extension programs, in one of the top agricultural states in the U.S.

Posted by: Pofarmer | April 12, 2008 at 10:26 AM

So they are bitter about a lack of government funding?

These people are not to be defended.

If people would not look to the government for salvation, then maybe they might not be so "bitter". This is the true answer to Obama's comments.

It's just a wonder he does not see the irony.


I am a Pennsylvanian, but not a listener of Limbaugh, but I have this feeling that "Operation Chaos" will be bigger on April 22 than anyone has imagined.

Obama (fool) is going down in Pennsylvania.

Posted by: Neo | April 12, 2008 at 10:40 AM

1. He has 9 days to spend money that Hillary does not have.

2. 9 days is a long time in politics.

3. It still won't get Hillary the nomination.

Obama will have to be fought at the general (unless we get the "gift of Hillary" by coup) and we need to be better prepared than this.

In 7 months none of this will matter (as it ain't hardly working now).


MayBee and Elliott upthread - exactly. That's why I loathed Thomas Frank's book so much. He's saying, it's okay for us liberal elites to vote against our economic interests, because we're smarter than you and we know better. But we need you backwoods rubes to vote your economic interests (or what we take to be your interests) so we can win elections. I don't see much difference between that and Obama's remarks.

In the 1990s I was a fan of Frank's when he was the editor of The Baffler, a snarky hipster "journal" loosely based out of (surprise!) the University of Chicago. At the time I was an idiot and thought he/it was brilliant. He's a smart guy but like his hero Mencken is way too in love with his own cleverness.

Posted by: Porchlight | April 12, 2008 at 11:00 AM

Well, as Europe shows, they do not vote for their economic interests when they vote socialist.

That is a surefire way to drive up unemployment.


I is so glad the democrats R the party for duh middle class and duh poor like me who gotted scred by bush bekause I be edukated and cannot find job?

i likes Osama bekause he gonna gimmie free medicine fix global werming and end war by surrendering 2 R buddies in Al-Kayda. I have gun bekause I feer mexicans and drink beer.


i likes Osama bekause he gonna gimmie free medicine fix global werming and end war by surrendering 2 R buddies in Al-Kayda. I have gun bekause I feer mexicans and drink beer.

The comments to this entry are closed.