Where is the truth, or the democracy right now, not just in the Democratic Party, but in America?
What is the most troubling thing about this election?
Seeing America’s big McDumbdown in action. I have a lot of problems with the way the media has tried to shove Hillary Clinton aside. She is my candidate of choice, not Obama or McCain. But, because of what the Democratic Party has done to my candidate, I have no choice to become a Republican in the fall.
Nothing is going to heal the split for me, and there is no way that Obama can ever redeem himself in my eyes. Like many in America, after watching Reverend Wright we were left dazed and confused by the HATE pouring out. I always had some notion of the Black Church being about the Gospel. Not anymore.
I watched Obama’s glitzy target-marketing in the web. I watched the biggest web browser in the bunch help him out with a “bubble sort.” I watched his pal David Axelrod use branding techniques to manipulate the American psyche. I’ve watched all this happen while the FEC is shutdown in Washington D.C. I’ve watched the fundraising, and nobody questions it. I’ve seen videos of Obama’s Southside Chicago slums. I’ve read about his ties to very unsavory types, while the Press is too dumb to unpack it for the American Public.
I’ve seen the Black Press criticize him, too.
I’ve seen his propaganda. HOPE, CHANGE, PROGRESS. But, I haven’t seen ONE speech about what all this means. Not one. What I have seen him do is target market to different segments of the American Public in order to get the votes. I’ve seen ads from San Francisco where he refused to pose with the gay mayor after raking in the big bucks off that demographic.
I’ve watched him adapt his posters, logos and slogans to fit the mood of each state, ethnicity, and even gender as he rolls along. I’ve seen electioneering happen twice. Once in Indiana on video, and once in an image from the venerable New York Times, and yet? Why isn’t this an issue? Why isn’t any of this an issue?
I’ve watched him try and silence Hillary Clinton on television during the debates.
What do I see? A phony. A glad handing phony and who knows what his real agenda is?
He has caused nothing but division within the Democratic Party. And, my question is who can buy him? Who? And, what would they need to buy him for? He’s been sold like a McSandwich stuffed down the American throat, except, it makes some of us gag. It’s his associations that we can’t understand. Big names many of us knew nothing about until this election. Some part of the Democratic Party that is far left of everything we consider American. It’s his arrogance, in light of saying he’d “consider hiring” Al Gore.
It’s his non-green “Plastic” lawn signs. Well, is Gore going to step up to the plate on those?
He’s been called the “teflon” candidate. Isn’t styrofoam more like it?
The problem with Barack Obama is that America doesn’t know who he is, do they? For this, we can fault the media and its lack of deep coverage. Even they appear to be starstruck by glitz. Except the glitz isn’t glamorous. It looks a hell of a lot like some kind of 30’s fascism redux. To those smart enough, or educated enough to see through it. Looking around in the web there are all sorts of opinions about this untested newcomer. Here is a pretty astute little article on the whole fascism gig from NewsBusters.org:
I’m quoting from this interview here, Goldberg has written a book on Liberal Fascism and has said here:
“…To the extent that Barack Obama is running a campaign almost explicitly as a political religion where he’s sort of a messiah type, those sorts of themes fit into my argument about what liberalism is and how it sort of has a resemblance to fascism. But whether he’s in fact a-I don’t think he’s a fascist in the way the average person means it but in the way I define liberal fascism in my book, he’s probably as good a candidate as anybody is for a liberal fascist…
GOLDBERG: Well, I hear versions of that quite a bit and I think there are a bunch of different things going on there and I think they’re all to one extent or another, wrong. First of all, Ronald Reagan which at times does sound superficially like Barack Obama’s: Reagan talked about a shining city on a hill, and all that kind of stuff and he had this wonderful rhetoric about patriotism and unity and all these kinds of things. And I’m sure you could find all sorts of other comparisons between Reagan’s rhetoric and Obama’s. But at the end of the day, Reagan was romanticizing not government but the glories and wonders of the American people and what they can do with God’s gift of freedom. Which is an enormous distinction.
Reagan still believed that government wasn’t the solution, it was the problem. And Obama’s approach is the exact opposite of that. Reagan comes from the National Review tradition of believing that a virtuous, a truly virtuous society can only be the end-product of a free society. For virtue not freely chosen is not virtue as Frank Meyer might say. And Obama’s whole shtick is that we must be unified and hopeful for what the government itself can do for us. Michelle Obama says Barack Obama is going to cure and heal our sickened souls. From my perspective, we have a Second Amendment precisely to keep governments who think they are in the soul-fixing business at bay.
I don’t want the government to try and fix my soul. When Barack Obama has his door-knocking volunteers go around, they’re instructed not to talk about issues but to talk about how they came to Obama in the same way that people talk about coming to Jesus. That scares me. And that’s not Reaganesque. Reagan’s whole approach-I think Obama’s gift for oratory and for seeming like a decent and compelling personality that you’d want to know and you enjoy listening to, that kind of stuff is Reaganesque. His ability to read a script is Reaganesque and I think those comparisons are perfectly legitimate just as I think comparisons between Mike Huckabee and Reagan on that score-his ability to connect with people are fair. But in terms of philosophy, the last thing in the world that Reagan represented was the idea that we should sort of turn politics into this quasi-religious enterprise where a great leader using government can redeem the society and deliver us to some sort of utopian place where we all sort of have to work together, that’s not Reaganesque. That’s the opposite of Reaganism…”
Yeah, It’s a little like that…but there is more interesting stuff this week in the Black Press over at Black Agenda Report like this. Reading it made me sad, especially the piece on House Slaves. Christ. But, maybe, we need to understand what is going on post some 70’s notion that we were all grooving together ala Martin Luther King. Because Obama and Wright have really fucked up the notion for me right now that there is ANY lovefest of togetherness racially in this country of mine. What I see is nothing but VITRIOL.
To tell you the truth? I don’t think Obama gives a fuck about Black People. Or White People. Or Brown People. Or Yellow People. Or any people. He sides with whoever he needs to in the moment, doesn’t he? You see, I have concerns about how he can just dump his pastor like snapping his magical little fingers. If it is true that he has a Black racial agenda, well?
Do you know what Barack Obama has done to me? He’s made me question my loyalty to Dr. King. Completely. He’s made me look twice at all the black homeless people I see. What kind of HOPE is he going to give them? Where is the plan? Why doesn’t he put some of that money down Katrina way? No. That would be too much to ask.
Who among all these politicians could care for all of the faces that make up AMERICA? Hillary Clinton. I’m not seeing any “White Agenda” coming out of her campaign. She’s just a straight up Democrat. In lieu of her? The candidate who has faced the MOST VITRIOL EVER? For no FUCKING REASON FROM THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY?
I’ll take McCain, and become a Republican, rather than see my country under Fascism.
Here is a sane editorial letter, from the INDYSTAR.com
Why isn’t the DNC thinking about these things?
The last time I saw this kind of fist was in the 70’s. You might want to read this from The Root, in order to get a clearer picture of why Donna Brazile would like Hillary Clinton to step aside. You know what I have to say to Donna Brazile as a FEMINIST? Thank you, for letting your Black Nationalism fuck up the Democratic Party and all that it has worked for in my lifetime. Thank you for your NON-FEMINISM and your penultimate stupidity.
Check this out, if you want to see what high school looked like in the 70’s, and again now from the Los Angeles Times. Have you personally solved anything since Mr. Luther King, Ms. Brazile? Your division of the Democratic Party will breed more of this, no doubt. It makes me very sad to realize that HOPE in my country looks like this, right now.
All those so called dumbed-down latte Corporate America big box shopping liberals?
What have you done for your country lately? The answer? Nada.
All you Recreate ‘68 rebellious ones? What about these kids, in this school? Who are you helping?
Somehow, I don’t think you can solve stuff like this by voting for Obama.
May the best candidate win. We do vote after all, don’t we?
What we need is a candidate who stands for AMERICA as a whole.
Need some more? Try this from The Stiletto. My sentiments exactly.
