43 Comments

1. Anthony (Los Angeles):

It’s amazing what a good example of Baum’s “man behind the curtain” Obama is.

Apr 25, 2008 - 7:56 am 2. tim maguire:

Of course it would be inappropriate to hold a person responsible for the actions of his friends, but it is perfectly appropriate to judge a person by the company he keeps.

Apr 25, 2008 - 8:41 am 3. Buddy Larsen:

exactly — apples & oranges — the one is a powerful human-rights legal concept, the other is a common-sense rule of thumb to help an individual cope with the dangerous unknown.

Apr 25, 2008 - 9:49 am 4. ron norman:

Just because Senator Obama has been in the church for 20 years and is running for President is the only reason this brouhaha has been aired ad-infinitum on YouTube and in every paper in the United States. Give former Farrakan acolyte Rev. ìGoddamn Americaî Wright a chance to explain his comment about 9/11 and how this “Goddamn America” deserves a terrorist attack and then maybe apoligize on Bill OíRiellyís News Program. Come on ëRev.í give us a big ìIím Sorryî and everything will be forgiven. At the same time maybe Senator Obama can clarify the reasons he stayed in the church after listening to stuff like this for so long. Maybe he was an FBI informant and he and Michelle were giving information or possibly he has a hearing problem and is embarrased to wear a hearing aid. Probably has a very good reason and as soon as people hear it they will flock to his banner.

Apr 25, 2008 - 12:10 pm 5. Buddy Larsen:

I personally disgree with the reverend; i think God probably likes constitutional democracy, human rights, free enterprise, and liberty & justice for all.

I know i do — even tho our practice of those ideals will always reflect human nature and thus be never perfectly perfect, at least it will be — if we can manage to keep it so — the ideal we will always continually work toward.

If the reverend is annoyed with human nature — well — that’s his job, to be so, actually.

But he’s got two different things mixed up — America does not have to stand in the dock over human nature — America’s systems exist precisely TO ameliorate human nature’s underside as much as the other considerations of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness will allow.

IOW, the reverend has got it good — Americans have got it good — so he’s way off base. Humanity did not design itself multi-hued — that’s just how we find ourselves — and of the many ways to cope with it, hate is probably the worst of all.

Apr 25, 2008 - 2:06 pm 6. Lem:

It would be interesting to know whether Hussein, where he not a politician, could obtain a national security clearance.

Could Hussein’s FBI’s background check reveal anything that would preclude him obtaining clearance?

How would the FBI categorize his Jeremiah association?

Apr 25, 2008 - 2:29 pm 7. Captain Hate:

Maybe Wright and Moyers can record a cd trying to outdo each other on who hates the United States more, that PBS can use as one of their “premiums” for the frequent beg-a-thons to supplement taxpayer swag.

Apr 25, 2008 - 4:35 pm 8. Barry Dauphin:

Wright should publicly speak as often as possible. In fact, give the guy a bigger microphone. Geez, I’l bet even nobody in San Francisco watches Moyers any more. The more Wright talks, the worse he will come across. His continued presence can only hurt Obama. Whatever Obama’s association with Wright did for him locally, it will put the kie-bosh on him nationally.

Apr 25, 2008 - 5:33 pm 9. Barry Dauphin:

Wright appears on Moyers: The handiwork of Karl Rove without the fingerprints.

Apr 25, 2008 - 5:39 pm 10. Rhod:

Buddy Larsen for President!

Apr 26, 2008 - 3:52 am 11. Buddy Larsen:

yuk yuk — but it’s true, a preacher is supposed to get under your skin — not rest on it.

Apr 26, 2008 - 6:24 am 12. Barrett:

“Buddy Larsen for President!”

Buddy, I know more about how you think and why you have your views than I do about Obama or Hillary (and you can probably throw in McCain too).

And you don’t even get press coverage! (How greatly has the fourth estate failed the American public?!)

Based upon that, I can say that you would be a better President than any of the lot.

Apr 26, 2008 - 2:15 pm 13. Buddy Larsen:

heh — yep — who *wouldn’t* make a better president than a professional senator, trained to always seek the least-objectionable consensus?

Apr 26, 2008 - 2:47 pm 14. Barrett:

Buddy,

Tell me if you agree. My sense is that you would say what you think and explain why it make sense knowing that some would disagree no matter what. That’s the difference.

The least objectionable consensus has brought us to these depths and my guess is the majority of Americans would appreciate someone who knew what they believed, wanted the best for the country and could articulate why it made sense. Regan did this.

Apr 26, 2008 - 3:22 pm 15. TerryeL:

Well Reagan did it for some people, believe it or not there were a lot of people who thought Reagan was an idiot.

I think the American people have changed since Reagan’s time. We are more polarized than we were back then and I wonder sometimes if Reagan could survive a 24 hours news cycle.

Apr 26, 2008 - 4:20 pm 16. TerryeL:

I have to admit I feel sorry for Bush. I think he is a decent man who does not deserve a lot of the crap he has had to take. In fact I think he is a better man than Obama could ever be.

Apr 26, 2008 - 4:25 pm 17. Barry Dauphin:

I have to admit I feel sorry for Bush. I think he is a decent man who does not deserve a lot of the crap he has had to take.

And I read more of it this morning in the WSJ via Peggy (Reagan was God) Noonan. The nostalgia for Reagan is amusing if one reads what was written about him at the time. He retained a level of popularity however that Bush does not have. Even at the time Reagan was the “great communicator”. Bush is not.

But W does not deserve the kind of crap hurled at him from the likes of Noonan who sounds more and more like Pauline Kael (”I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon.”) every week. Her latest is that whenever she gives a talk and badmouths the president, no one defends him, not even in Texas.

Apr 26, 2008 - 5:04 pm 18. TerryeL:

Barry:

Noonan is a pain in the ass. I think she is pissed that Bush did not give her a job as speech writer like Saint Reagan did. She acts like a woman scorned or something.

I have refused to read her for sometime so I will assume this article was her usual crap. Maybe the reason know one defends Bush at her talks is that most Bush fans would not be listening to her bitch and yammer in the first place. Or care to bother with her in any event.

I also heard she is mighty pissed about airport security. I can just imagine her accosting some poor slob at an airport somewhere when he asks her to take off her shoes…Don’t you know who I am? she would demand haughtily. No way that Reagan would allow her to be treated thus. No siree.

She is just another back stabber, looking out for herself.

Apr 26, 2008 - 5:34 pm 19. Barry Dauphin:

TerryeL

Yes she was kvetching about airport security and what an outrage it is that we check middle aged (white) women who are the bedrock of society and wouldn’t be terrorists, you know. The irony of her complaints is that the Dems were howling long and wide about racial profiling, so this is what you get. She can’t bring herself to find something admirable in our efforts to avoid prejudice and see this as a very small sacrifice in the WoT. She wants to forget about the WoT altogether.

I realize that Bush is not a great communicator and that he hasn’t really pushed for Americans to sacrifice and be part of something larger. But when I read the prissy indignation of Noonan, I think, Oh Gawd, what a spoiled, spoiled people we are. Does bush really have to be a great communicator for her to get it? She is a speechwriter for Chrissake. Saint Ronny bailed on Lebanon, a fact that did not elude the attention of OBL. Even if it were the “best” decision at the time, she has to intentionally be working hard to not see the unintended consequences of that decision. I guess love is blind, but it is apparently deaf and dumb too.

Apr 26, 2008 - 6:14 pm 20. Buddy Larsen:

i think y’all have peggy noonan’s number — her turn on GWB seemed arbitrary, out-of-the-blue and a tad cruel. i have never understood it. she says (by and large) it’s because he squandered the 911 mood. i think the 2004 election — with its tin-eared, crude, short-sighted and self-serving democratic stampede to the left in order to “be different” — is what squandered the 911 mood. i guess if noonan wants to compare GWB to a mythic ideal, that’s fine for her — but i don’t have to read it, and don’t anymore.

Apr 26, 2008 - 6:20 pm 21. Buddy Larsen:

she did have a great piece on the Pope — in the Sun or the Post, i forget which — it was rich and full of sense. i guess i DO still read her — just not on GWB.

Apr 26, 2008 - 6:25 pm 22. TerryeL:

I just refuse to read her, so if she has a great piece on anything I will just have to miss it.

I think Noonan thought she was going to get some freaking job or something, in any event, she is like a lot of other people. She is the one who squandered the 9/11 mood. All sorts of conservatives squandered it. They squandered it by bitching and moaning about Dubai Ports and Harriet Miers and the North American Union and all sorts of paranoid nonsense.

BTW, If I remember right Ronny did not leave us such a great legacy when it came to the Middle East or the Supreme Court or the all time important earth shattering topic of the day, illegal immigration.

Imagine the reaction to Iran/Contra if Bush was president. Please, Noonan would bail on him in a heartbeat. And the stock market crash…let us imagine the bug eyed hysterics of the financial pundits on cable to that.

No, Bush has had to treat people like babies. One thing about McCain, he won’t do that. He would tell Peggy Noonan to kiss his ass. Bush is too nice to people like Noonan.

Apr 26, 2008 - 8:13 pm 23. Buddy Larsen:

terrye, the only thing better than your writing is your thinking. or izzit the other way around –

Apr 26, 2008 - 8:32 pm 24. TerryeL:

Buddy:

Ahh, you are just sucking up. Hey, can I be your VP?

Apr 26, 2008 - 8:42 pm 25. TerryeL:

But Barry is right, if Reagan had dealt with the Islamists when they were a tumor then Bush would not have been forced to deal with the cancer. But Reagan was not prepared to take the risk politically. He had other fish to fry.

Apr 26, 2008 - 8:46 pm 26. Buddy Larsen:

i read somewhere that near the end of his last term, at the end of an interview in the oval, as he was walking the reporter (whose name i forget, natch), he said that Lebanon was his biggest mistake, and his greatest regret. but as you said, he had that domestic economic revolution–the rollback of carter’s socialist adventure–to nurture & manage.

on that VP thing, reckon you can dee-liver Oklyhomy?

Apr 26, 2008 - 9:08 pm 27. TerryeL:

Buddy:

I might be able to give you Oklahoma, I might even deliver Indiana. But, then again I think I could also be a polarizing figure. It is time for love and peace and unicorns. None of that unpleasant snotty stuff.

I have to admit, the Reagan years were not a very happy time for me. The farm crisis was kicking my butt and killing my marriage, so I do not remember the time with fondness. But I think that one thing that Reagan believed was that those terrorists were crazy and would eventually wear themselves out.

But when you think about that was when Afghanistan was really falling apart and that was when Hezbellah was getting control of Lebanon. There was no AlQaida yet. Bush would never be forgiven for failing to act if he had been Reagan.

But then that was a pattern with Reagan, he could get away with things that other people could not.

Apr 26, 2008 - 9:26 pm 28. Gary Rosen:

“the 2004 election — with its tin-eared, crude, short-sighted and self-serving democratic stampede to the left in order to “be different” ”

Buddy, that is exactly what drove me out of the Democratic party for good.

Apr 26, 2008 - 11:05 pm 29. Gary Rosen:

Reagan could have done better in Lebanon, but it’s asking a bit much from 2008 to demand that he should have done more to combat Islamic extremism. After all, he was still engaged in fighting Communism and Soviet Russia (remember them?).

Terrye, while I agree in general with your point that W is unfairly pilloried from the right as well as the left, he’s not exactly beyond criticism. E. g. the Miers pick was just a really weak one for the SCOTUS, regardless of ideology.

Apr 26, 2008 - 11:27 pm 30. Rhod:

Buddy’s right about the 2004 election, but the “different” then, as now, is the dreary myth that their candidates possess superior intelligence. It was perceived in the idiotic droning of John Kerry, and found everywhere in the facile, phony intellectualism of Barack Obama. I blame Adlai Stevenson for this crap. Combine intellectual vanity with power lust and you get a modern progressive. Bill Moyers will end up in a glass case as the model for this BS.

Apr 27, 2008 - 3:56 am 31. TerryeL:

Gary:

I am not faulting Reagan for not invading Iran or something, I am just saying that if Bush had been the one to drop the ball no excuses would have been good enough.

I realize that Reagan had other things to deal with, I remember the time. The truth is no president did enough before 9/11.

And I am not saying that Bush should never be criticized, but the level of nastiness and invective I sometimes hear is not criticism, it is something else entirely.

As for Miers, it seems to me I remember conservatives saying the President had a right to his nominee and the nominee had a right to an up or down vote. I guess those rules go out the window when the president fails to get a heads up from a bunch of pundits before he makes his pick.

Apr 27, 2008 - 6:42 am 32. TerryeL:

The truth is we will never know if Miers would have made a decent Supreme Court Justice or not. And now we have all these socalled conservatives threatening to sit out elections, doing their best to punish their own party and its leaders…in spite of the fact that the next president will almost certainly pick at least one Justice. So if they do not mind seeing President Obama pick the next justice, why should they get hysterical about Miers.

I did not just stop reading Noonan. I stopped reading Coulter too. Somehow when she did her “defence” of the Ivy League and let us know in no uncertain terms that people who go to state universities are just not top drawer…I decided I was done with her and her mouth.

The truth is the right has just as many elitists as the left and whether or not many of them want to admit it, they like stirring things up. It gives them something to bitch about and bitching is how they make a living.

Apr 27, 2008 - 6:49 am 33. Buddy Larsen:

Those pundits attacked GWB on the Miers nomination on the grounds that a president had better things to do than to go to the mat for an obscure judge that the beltway didn’t already well know.

But what they never grasped is that they too had better things to do, and the reason the president went to the mat is because they dragged him there.

All those attacks from the right — Miers, Ports, Borders — will fade into memory if Petraeus succeeds. If not, if for one reason or another the mideast falls to the jihad, historians will wonder why the American right weakened a war president who was already under relentless & severe anti-war attack from the left.

Apr 27, 2008 - 7:09 am 34. Barrett:

I guess we found a new ticket in Buddy and TerryeL!

In all seriousness, I appreciate and agree with your discourse. I just hope the majority if Americans are as thoughtful in the fall.

God Bless America!

Apr 27, 2008 - 8:24 am 35. Buddy Larsen:

guess i need to hitchhike down to Goodwill & pick me out a new suit

Apr 27, 2008 - 9:02 am 36. TerryeL:

Barret:

You are such a sweetie.

Apr 27, 2008 - 11:20 am 37. Buddy Larsen:

yep — very generous & sunny commentary –

Apr 27, 2008 - 1:07 pm 38. Gary Rosen:

Perhaps I was being a bit argumentative, but the country could do worse than a Buddy/Terrye ticket (and probably will, rimshot).

Apr 27, 2008 - 3:02 pm 39. Buddy Larsen:

well, in defense of my candidacy, let me point out that I am often out standing in my field.

Apr 27, 2008 - 3:32 pm 40. TerryeL:

Gary:

Now I really am getting a big head.

Apr 27, 2008 - 3:33 pm 41. Rhod:

When I nominated Buddy, I thought he’d say something like “throw the rascal in”, or maybe a quip about the country needing something really good for a nickel…or even that he’d demand a recount if he was elected. No, he’s out looking for a suit and a running mate.

Apr 27, 2008 - 5:17 pm 42. Rhod:

Oh yeah, he had the “pick ME out a new suit” Kerryism down. I’m voting for Markus.

Apr 27, 2008 - 5:21 pm 43. Buddy Larsen:

I’d just like to say, throw the rascal in, and I think the country needs something really good for a nickel, and if the American people see fit to elect me, I’ll immediately demand a recount. Also, unlike my opponent markus, I will never pander just to get a vote.

Apr 27, 2008 - 6:40 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: