Obama’s candidacy is at one level a cultural phenomenon, partly because he’s a “blank slate” on which certain people can project their political fantasies. Marginal groups are specially prone to projecting their fantasies. How much of the fantastic emanates from Obama himself and how much from fringe groups attaching themselves to BHO’s star or imagining he is the AntiChrist?

There’s an argument to be made that some of the bad vibes come from Obama’s campaign decisions. Shepherd Fairy, one of his artists has the “Obey Obama” theme. Then there was the logo, the visual themes. Finally there are the Action Wires and the Acorn earmark. The “Sing for Change” video was apparenly produced by a professional crew. So it’s probable that a part of BHO’s campaign at least, is not averse to this cult of personality.

Having said that, at least some of Obama’s opponents wish to see him as Hitler for the worst of reasons. The dilemma is that there may objectively be some reason to think that parts of BHO’s campaign are in fact not salubrious, such as for example, the Ayers people. The problem is how to denounce that type of Obama backer without making cause with the genuine bigots.

Mao also said: “The revolutionary army is to the people as the fish is to the ocean.”

I’m sorry. I just don’t see the revolutionary condition. You’re all fired up, but the people aren’t with you.

The only thing that you would achieve would be to hasten the bad juju and make it even more popular. (Timothy McVeigh had heroic music in his head, too. What was the result of Oklahoma City? The constitutionalist cause was set back for more than a decade.)

Can you or whiskey prevent any of the catastrophes that you fear with threats of political violence? Will you inspire the people to rise up and follow your brave example? What levels of collateral damage are you willing to risk? How much collateral damage do you think that you would be allowed before you, yourself are ratted out and shot like a dog?

I surely believe that an Obama presidency would give aid and comfort to our enemies. So, you would advocate that we double his glee with a civil conflict, or, even better, a race war!!

Oh, I guess that you think it would be a quick and clean, surgical affair. We’ll frog march the culprits to the gallows and everything will return to normal.
How in the wide world of sports do you expect me, or anybody else, to have even a molecule of confidence that you would have the political skill or power to return things to “normal,” if you can’t manage a few political victories under constitutional order? How would you control all of the bad men let loose across the land during a civil conflict?

What about our sons and daughters in the military and law enforcement? Shall they abandon their oaths to defend the constitution? Oh, that’s right, you have a purer, more exquisite interpretation of the constitution. (Sounds like taqfir to me … )

Political violence is a profound thing. Only fools contemplate it lightly.

In the here-and-now presidential campaign, the chance that our opponents might capitalize on these intemperate postings weighs more heavily for me than any momentary thrill you might get from them.

First, we work our asses off to elect John McCain. Then we either celebrate or mourn the result. Then we work our asses off to nudge things in a better direction. Only when every, and I mean EVERY, legal effort has been expended will I ever tolerate or entertain talk of political violence.

“… I disagree with Kristol. I think it is a mistake to let the timing of the election rush us, into a wrong headed sollution to a “problem” that has been decades in the making. ”

Again, I don’t like the bailout either, particularly with all the pork that was attached to it. However if you didn’t like the bailout, then just imagine how much you’ll dislike the legislation coming from a liberal Democrat controlled Congress with the Messiah as President.

We need to keep our eye on the ball. The immediate objective is to keep the Messiah out of the White House. After that we can focus on replacing liberal congressmen with fiscal conservatives.

“To summarize it: McCain has taken a significant political hit due to the economy. Sarah Palin has performed well and McCain’s campaign is poised for a comeback provided the House of Representatives votes through the bailout. One may disagree with the wisdom of the bailout (I do) but having the Messiah as President would ultimately be far worse for the economy. If the only way to keep the Messiah out of the White House is to vote for the bailout then the bailout should happen.”

eggplant accurately summarizes the Kristol piece … but I disagree with Kristol.

I think it is a mistake to let the timing of the election rush us, into a wrong headed sollution to a “problem” that has been decades in the making.

I place “problem” in quotes because a case can be made that certain people did this deliberately, and other certain people knew about it and were running interference for it, all for the sake of lining their own pockets at what would ultimately become the american public’s expense. In other words this wasnt entirely an accident, it was done on purpose, and by people that were not entirely ignorant of the consequences. Though the law of unintended consequences also made a brief appearance (ie. public outcry squashing the house bill on monday).

It’s unfortunate that the crisis should come to a head right before such a significant election (though perhaps not coincidental), but short term thinking is bound to worsen the situation over time.

I guess you could say that I want to have my cake and eat it too. See Obama lose in November (I was a Romney supporter early on) and still see us move forward with a well thought out response to the banking mess. I like to think its not an either/or situation, but what is done is done at this point.

Im steeling my self right now to vote against every incumbent on every ballot that I ever encounter for the rest of my life. The idea of term limits is a decent one but the mice that guard the cheese will never do that to themselves, so we will never see it (done right) in law. … But what if mysteriously every time either party runs an incumbent the other party (the non-incumbent) takes the seat. I like to think that eventually the parties would get the message and stop running incumbents. Im talking about a cultural change amont the electorate that would knock the cycle of self-interest out of round at a minimum … maybe even break it.

I’d say too many people with too much time on their hands thinking things in time have some ultimate importance.

Those chubbies in the video don’t seem to be a vanguard revolutionary formation to me. But then, idle hands are the devils workshop, and, never give a rifle to a melancholy bore.

So, therefore, what? We go all chicken little with 30 days left?

Verbal confrontations are “unnecessary conflict,” but political violence is OK?

Back to first principles, my friend. What is it that we want to defend?