A Tale of Hope And Change:

Before the election there was a difficult and frustrating war. The homeland hadn’t actually been invaded, but it had been bombed, and prominent foreign presences made people uneasy. The economy was in turmoil. People had lost jobs and homes. The electorate was divided and bitter. Into this tumult came a politician who seemed to be more than just a politician. He spoke in soaring rhetoric. He promised hope and change. People hearkened to his message. Though he had been obscure before, with little track record to show, he took advantage of new media to transmit his message and to organize his party and the people.

There were some questions about his past. He seemed to have radical and racist associations. There were even questions about his nationality. He was born outside the main homeland, and details of his youth and upbringing were sparse. He was young, untested and without relevant experience, some people said. But they were not many. Mostly people wanted something to believe in, and didn’t mind the details. People were discontented. The nation was searching. Conventional politics had made people cynical. His charismatic presence and his rock-concert-like speeches, on the other hand, were a relief compared to politics as usual. In a speech in Berlin he urged people to remember history, to answer destiny, to stand as one, to work, sacrifice and struggle for something greater. So people overlooked the questions, or just didn’t ask them in the first place. People really just hoped for change and they no longer cared about the consequences.

“Yes!” That was all he asked, just say “Yes!” And people did. And so Adolf Hitler was elected.

… And, incidentally, the fact that “Nazi” is short for “National Socialist” may be old, but it is neither tired nor sophistry, just inconvenient … for you. And if you think Obama is not a socialist, you haven’t been paying attention.

If you pursuit the namecalling leftists on ChimpyMcHitlerBush&CheneyCo just as fervently, then yes you earned the right and get to question others’ namecalling.

John: what is it about Obama’s name that makes it impossible for you, in your own polemical rant, to state it without embellishing it somehow? And why are you unable to discuss him without accusing his supporters of being stupid and irrational? And finally, what the hell is PMA? The least you could do is define it. But maybe you’d rather bask smugly in your own superior knowledge of psychiatric acronyms, just like a true arrogant elitist would do.

pch 1013, I have snipped the only fact based portion of your polemical rant.
As a candidate, Ohhhhhh…..BAAMA’s task is convincing us that he is sincere and can be taken at face value. From his slide in the polls caused in part by his recanting almost ALL his positions so far, I would say anyone with an average or slightly below average IQ would see Obamassiah as insincere and not to be taken at face value.
It is only the true believers that ignore the discordance between his words of today and his words of yesterday. Normal people see him saying what ever his current audience wants to hear and wonders if he means any of it.
Then you have his blatant arrogance and obvious elitism and and it starts to become clear that that person has serious mental issues.
That leads the rational to wonder just how safe it is to have him holding the button.
If he continues to slide in the polls, his assumption that he is the nominee will come back to haunt him. The PMA stuff is good in theory and the classroom, but it doesn’t fly in the real world. Stand in front of a run-a-way train and load up on PMA about the train stopping and see how much good it does on you. Those stock brokers jumping out of the 110th floor windows of the WTC had LOTS of PMA. What they didn’t have was wings. The PMA didn’t do them a bit of good when they hit the concrete at 186mph.
That PMA won’t do Ohhhhh…..BAAMA any good in November, if he gets that far.