34 Comments

If Clinton was triangulation, Obama is tesseractulation.

“OH” stated that he thought the war was a mistake, and that he would have all the erm, Combat? troops out within sixteen months of his taking office no matter what. Everything else he states, whether seeming pro troop or anti Bush, is allowable because the original position as given, allows for so much wiggle room as to include the grand canyon. It is less a point of departure for discussion as it is a name of a general location, like Texas, or the Mississippi delta.

The push or pull around a pivot doesn’t matter as long as the object with rotational symmetry does not lie outside the gravitational bounds of our sun.
Hey its all about appearing to be consistent. Isn’t it?

I’m confused. Why would the U.S. want to stay in Iraq again?

Obama is just jive talking you. He still thinks he is talking as a community organizer from Rev Wright’s church where that is expected of you.

And why we should stay in Iraq, it’s foreign to lefties, but it’s called freedom and Democracy — For Iraqis. From the pictures I see, the Iraqis are getting the hang of it really quick. A free Democratic State of Iraq in the middle of all the head chopping nice people, may just give others the idea. Freedom is contagious, except of course to the practitioners of environmental Marxism, then it’s dangerous.

“Why would the U.S. want to stay in Iraq again?”

Because if we leave, we’ll just have to go back. Think of it as decreasing our national defense carbon footprint until we have nuclear powered troop and cargo ships and hybrid C-5As.

I’m not a gambler, but I think of Obama as a human roulette wheel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roulette

If the odds break in your favor, baby gets a new pair of shoes. If they don’t, you lose the family farm. That’s what’s so terrifying about His Obamessiah: he seems to have adopted a Martingale Strategy that history will hit the snooze button on 20 January 2009.

Re: Plan c

Muslims in Britain should be able to live under Sharia law, says top judge

I’m reminded of Monty Python’s election special tabulating the election results between the Serious Party and the Silly Party. It is conventional wisdom in America that a presidential candidate must sound like he is from the Silly Party to get the presidential nomination while he must sound like he is from the Serious Party to win in the general election.

There are people who can be very convincing at not making any sense. Such a man sounds honest. He sounds believable. He sounds honorable. He sounds compelling. He sounds wonderful. But if you stop to remember what he actually said, what he told you is utter nonsense that doesn’t add up. That’s why listening to the actual words of a speech can be more important than listening to its cadences, for the actual meaning of a speech can often escape those who are there to listen to it.

In the mental universe of a pathological liar, the logical coherence of an actual policy position is irrelevant; what’s important is sounding like the standard bearer of the Serious Party. To such a man, it is important to look straight into the camera to the point of jutting one’s face into the camera to show he is really looking you in the eye and then telling you what he thinks you want to hear with a sound of utter sincerity. Why, he may be as honest as a Denver man can be…

Decades ago I lived in North Beach in San Fransisco and there were a lot Italian restaurants there that ran lunch specials. For $2.50 you could choose what you liked from a group of appetizers; choose one from a group of main courses; choose from a group of side dishes and deserts and beverages. And actually put together quite an inexpensive feast.

What we have in Sen. Obama is the “choose one from each group” candidate. For each issue he puts out a group of positions. You choose the one you like. The other positions in the group you simply assume are a pander to special interest. Regrettably, pandering is something he has to do to get elected so he can put your positions — your personalized political feast — into action. Because he really believes as you do and believes in you just as you believe in him. So on trade: He is for Nafta. He is against Nafta. He is only a little skeptical of Nafta. All at the same time. A contradiction? No, you choose one and disregard the others. Just like Ann Althouse does, and she’s no dummy: http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/archives2/021000.php

And in this way you can put together quite an expensive political feast. Only in the end it will be pot luck and charred mystery meat. After all, it is government he’ll be running, not a family owned Italian restaurant in a “mad about food” city (and just plain crazy in politics).

Ha! I guess 2006 didn’t teach the dems jack-shit. “Hey, just elect us and we’ll end that nasty ol’ war that doesnt’t really affect you much at all, we sure will.”

Loser idiots.

But they’re such cute little loser idiots when they get all puffed up and smug in their assumed superiority.

Ha! I guess 2006 didn’t teach the dems jack-shit. “Hey, just elect us and we’ll end that nasty ol’ war that doesnt’t really affect you much at all, we sure will.”

Obama may not mind conveying the impression that he is insincere at all. Much of his base will vote for him no matter what, even they know deep in their hearts that his position on the war depends on political expediency. Moreover, some Republicans may vote Obama figuring that his antiwar stance is insincere anyway. So even if no one believes anything he says about the war enough people are going to vote for him any because they believe they know what he “really” means. Or at least they think they do. What’s self-evident is that in the situation the last laugh will be Obama’s by definition.

Obama once described himself as a “blank canvas” on which people could project their aspirations. But maybe it’s more accurate to say he’s a movie multiplex where several movies can be showing all at once. And he can collect tickets at every single entrance. One might ask how any candidate can run on this basis. But PT Barnum believed that “nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people”. Who’s to say Obama’s strategy won’t pay off? As Glenn Reynolds recently put it, it’s not as if people don’t know they’re being lied to. Obama knows what certain voters really want and he’s prepared to give it to them.

It took me a while to realize that a significant number of people actually pay to be lied to. The classic situation was depicted by the Evil Queen in Snow White. “Mirror, mirror on the wall …” The reason why people surround themselves with toadies is precisely so that they will be lied to. How long would a stylist last if he/she told his clients what they really looked like?

Many people prefer not to know. Take it away, I don’t want to deal with it. For example, the BBC received a torrent of complaints after it aired a video showing the Palestinian who drove the front loader used in a recent terrorist attack being shot by the police.

BBC News has received 61 complaints after its 10pm bulletin on BBC1 showed police shooting dead a man who drove a bulldozer into vehicles in Jerusalem.

Viewers last night saw shots being fired at the man in the cab of the bulldozer and his final moments. It was shown a minute into the programme. … Craig Oliver, editor of the 6pm and 10pm news, explained on the BBC’s editors’ blog why he had taken the decision to show the shooting.

“I took a different view at Ten - deciding to run the pictures in full with a clear warning that the audience was about to see images of a man being shot dead. This was not an easy decision - we never want to shock for the sake of it, or to sensationalise the news,” he wrote.

There’s an enormous reluctance among many to know how sausages are made, or what terror and counter-terrorism involves. In one Obama video, a beautiful celebrity says, “I just want the war to end”. But a little later in the video, if I recall aright, someone else says, “I want my children to be safe”. What some people really mean, perhaps innocently, is “I want my children to be safe but don’t tell me how you do it.”

A population like that really wants to be lied to. And this phenomenon is not confined to Liberals. Conservatives are also like that sometimes. Most people to a certain degree want to be shielded from hard choices. Back when I’d be asked to go to see the corpse in the mortuary, or attend the actual cremation of a person’s remains because the relatives couldn’t bring themselves to do it. I understood and you really don’t blame people for feeling that.

Like it or not there is a market for a candidate who will say, ‘I will make it all go away. Charm our enemies; make friends. End racial prejudice. Guarantee your job. End the war. Keep you safe. And if it sounds too good to be true, don’t doubt it. Yes we can.’ My guess is that the more sophisticated liberals understand this is rhetoric to some extent. But for many it is a salvational promise. Unfortunately, Obama’s just a man, a man from Chicago.

Charles Frith:
I’m confused. Why would the U.S. want to stay in Iraq again?
Jul 3, 2008 - 7:18 pm

As evidenced in Obamessiah’s desperate tacking to the Center, then surfing back to hold hands with Leftists emotionally committed to defeat that he isn’t abandoning them, just Iraq - there appears to be plenty of confusion. And it is a joy to watch the hard work of proving Democrats remain unreliable on National Security and Iraq will breed 30 more years of distrust of them, just as their commitment to the defeat and abandonment of S Vietnam and Cambodia previously reaped such a dubious award.

Of course, Charles Frith’s confusion is as manifest as Obamas.

The “real vital interest”, according to them is in us abandoning the war we almost won, perhaps stopping the rout of AQ in the Central Frontof War, and run from the nation whose immediate stability challenges and vast energy resources and present bases we can project power from - so that we can focus on “the real threat” which is Afghanistan and Pakistan. Where we are supposed to win at all costs, because this strategic backwater of lawless tribal lands in two countries has a radical Islam problem…which really isn’t a problem as Islam is good and Jihad is about the peaceful inner struggle aimed at advancing the brotherhood of man according to Lefties. But we “owe” it to the nutballs to stabilize the country, while we pursue the “Real AQ” the 5-6 high value targets we seek, especially the Great White Whale that served as a nice taunt to Bush why he hadn’t invaded nuclear Pakistan to start the hide and seek of Binnie which might take years to find, if ever, as we fought 30 million Pashtuns, took 80,000 to 140,000 casualties - and where Pakistan would ensure we lost our only air and land supply lines into Afghanistan, coming through Pakistan, as retaliation.

Ensuring, of course, that even with supplies cut-off, fighting off millions of Pashtuns, we would somehow get in huge numbers of civilian lawyers and evidence collection experts to preserve Ayman and Binnies “sacred terrorist civil liberties” and access to habeas if we ever find them and take them alive.

With that grand muddle, it is no wonder Charles Frith is confused.

Abandon the most strategically critical country in a global recession and energy crisis. Turn near-victory into defeat and allow AQ back in. Then focus on a lawless backwater to fight millions to get the right to look for 6 guys you want to hook up with ACLU lawyers, but only after invading a nuclear power’s territory and cutting supply lines.

Pure Obamessiah genius. The fun part is Obama likely didn’t mean a word of it - he just chose words that sounded good to his hard Left base to get him their votes and justify cutting and running by saying a pack of millions of illiterate savages in remote mountains and the 6 discredited AQ leaders harbored there were the “real threat” instead. And equal fun because the Obamabots actually think Obamessiah was serious.

Boy, am I ever reminded of a president we had 30 years ago. An inability to rotate while appearing to, confusing everyone who tries to focus on him. An inappropriate sureness of self while creating slippery surfaces all around.

Obama needs a good honest mirror and the willingness to accept what he sees. Sadly, I am not sure he has either.

Obama isn’t running on his record in Chicago or the Senate. He is running on the future, which incidentally hasn’t happened yet.

Brilliant phrasing, and accurate as well. Obama is selling his voters a future they want to believe in so badly, they choose not to examine it too closely. Like a gift horse, one should never look a promised fairy tale future in the mouth.

The baby senator from Illinois is every bit as unprepared to lead as was Jimmy Carter–whose legacy includes revolutionary Iran and Robert Mugabe. Can the world really survive another Carter?

Last night I heard Charles Krauthamer observe “Obama is for the principle of free trade, but he has voted against every free trade treaty put forth since he has been in office. This is a brillant strategy.”

And that sums it up for so many things. He is for so many things but against the inevitably messy details. For winning the war but against actually doing anything feasible. For solving the energy problem but against more drilling for oil - and no doubt, when it comes to it, solar power farms, wind energy installations, and nuclear power plants as well. For 2nd amendment rights but against gun ownership anywhere the government does not want it. For faith based initiatives but against them being run by people who actually are religious.

And, by the way, he has no alternative plans of his own of any kind.

Yes, Brilliant.

And Krauthammer Today

We should judge him by his past associations. He came out of the hard American left and then morphed into a black Chicago pol with ties to the mob and the Daley gang.
He smells the weakness of the youth and the messed up women. His religious base is a hate whitey pseudo Christianity.
The left thinks that there is still a pot of gold to steal from the taxpayers and the right thinks that the oil prices are due to the newly “rich” Chinese and Indians. I have an economist friend who can not believe that the BLS lies about our inflation. We would be told about such lies by the press he claims. My friend has a Ph.D. in economics from Chicago and worships Uncle Milty Friedman’s memory.
The Minn Fed just put out an annual report saying that the banks are really too big to fail. Wall Street will love it.
Get ready for hyperinflation. Our economic situation seems to be of no concern to the folks who write in this blog.

Hey C-fudd, tell us again about the “heart and courage” your boy Kuntar had for smashing the head of a 4-year-old Jewish girl against a rock. Don’t lie and weasel out about it again, come clean and tell us how much you admire him. Someone here said his name should be spelled with a “C”. That would make it the only one that ever turned you on.

Rosen, once again showing why the Jews have such a likeability problem.

Ironic the most well-read people, the Jews, never bothered to read Dale Carnaghie.

Wretchard, Obama will NOT win.

I blogged about it here.

Obama is relying on the Youth Vote, Blacks, and the rich white yuppies. But Seniors outnumber the Youth Vote by 8 million. Baby Busts have consequences. Seniors vote around 76%, the Youth Vote participates at less than 50%. Going by the 2004 data from the US Census bureau.

Moreover, Seniors and middle aged people have vastly different priorities than Iraq. Gas prices, crime, food prices. Obama is on the wrong side of all of those issues. Iraq probably doesn’t matter. He can’t pivot on the most important issues, because his base will revolt. Gas prices? They must be HIGH! Crime? Same.

Obama’s strategy wrt Iraq is easy — when it was hard he was ready to cut &run, now its better he’s willing to give it a shot. IOW its a “which way the wind blows”, get out in front approach. Seen that way he’s coherent.

It’s just nothing that resembles actual ‘leadership’ in the slightest.

And he can maneuver in this framework with*out* ever saying he was wrong before. The cheat, that will hopefully not fool too many left-leaning war supporters (there are some), is that his previous position –quit when the going gets tough– will never turn anything around, as Bush did.

What I note about this blog is, so many people have good ideas, but none joins the Army.

You ready to sign on the line, Nahncee?

“Rosen, once again showing why the Jews have such a likeability problem.”

Is that why you have been banned from numerous blogs while I haven’t been banned from any? And of course you still didn’t answer, C-fudd, you never will because you don’t have the guts.

bobal,
No comments this thread, but, USN 4 yrs active 20 yrs reserve, including recall to desert storm supporting 5th Marine Expeditionaty Brigade…Oooh rah.

Bobal: No, I did not join the Army, either. Instead 25 years active duty USAF, not counting 4 years ROTC.

Actually, Bobal, people like you should join the Army. You’d be a fifth column at most–and you’d get plenty of admiration from those San Franciscans who only support the troops when the shoot their officers–and at the very least your ilk would tie-up the military’s time with many, many courts martial for refusing to obey legal orders, thereby hampering the important work.

Have at it.

Obama’s campaign, and principals are similar to “environmental art”. The work itself is splashy and filled with notions that are whimsical and free or serious and ordered, depending on what audience is viewing it. Yet it is all a temporary and all transitional art work writ large.
It is like viewing an early decolage billboard, with panels ripped to various depths so messages from months or even years of advertisements bear witness to the peculiarities projected by the beholder.

It is no deeper than the layers of the paper, or petroleum based fabric nor the meaning any more discernible or real.

Comments like “Bobal” are really beginning to irritate me. Is he/she actually suggesting that there should be a military political class? Only the military political class may comment on and formulate opinion on war? Is that what “Bobal” wants?

Someone: No, Bobal is trying to say that only active duty personnel can support the war, ANYONE can oppose the war. It’s an attempt at censorship that seen quite often from the left.

Alexis;
You mind me of the grifter’s motto: “Once you can fake sincerity, everything else is easy!”

And I do b’lieve that’s Oblabla’s only skill.

Wretchard;
Give genius its due; the correct quote is “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American PUBLIC,” and it’s H.L. Mencken’s, not Barnum’s.