And I'm not saying this in jest or to start a fight, I just want anyone supporting Obama to give me their response to this...and not some anti-McCain rant, either...just an honest response to the question at hand...
Your candidate for President has children singing for him a la Stalin or Chairman Mao, and is put forward by people as their Personal Jesus or as the Messiah himself, and he doesn't do anything to downplay this cult of personality that has begun to surround him. In fact, he seems to revel in it.
Does any of this bother you at all? Does it rub you the wrong way? Or...is this exactly what you're looking for?
Honestly, I just want to know if these are aspects of Obama that Democrats truly believe in and like...or if you're accepting these things as part of the package, and are simply thinking "well, he's not a Republican, that's all that matters to me."
Just wondering. Please reply below.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Shoot, I think McCain's most effective line of attack would be to find those floor-to-ceiling pictures of Obama they have at the local HQ, combine with the huge screaming crowds, add in an ominous voice reminding viewers that Democrats will control both Houses of Congress by large margins next year and ask:
"Should this man have that much power?"
Sure, it's a little disturbing. But after seeing the frenzy to rename airports and highways after the 40th president, and seeing those huge pictures of Ike they used at rallies back in the day, historical perspective would say that it's nothing new.
Glad to see you're back.
When are you going to stop engaging in pointless distraction and smear tactics?
The economy has emerged as the central issue in this election. Barack Obama is pummeling your candidate in the polls precisely because he is perceived (rightly, I think) as being stronger and more knowledgeable on issues related to your economy.
How will your candidate change the public's perception that he is ridiculously weak on economic issues?
If you can't answer this question in a convincing way in the next twenty days, you are going to lose this election by historic margins. And yet you continue to dodge and refuse to address this issue. Under the circumstances, I think that attacking a bunch of children and their parents for providing entertainment at Barack Obama's rallies.
Perhaps I am paraphrasing Rodgers and Hammerstein here a bit, but there really are those of us who prefer the songs of children to the kind of ugly threats one hears so often today at Republican rallies for John McCain and Sarah Palin.
You make a very interesting point and counter-point, Adam.
You stated there was a frenzy to place Reagan's name on airports and highways, and that is undoubtedly true...but that was after his presidency. People did not decide between Reagan or Carter until the last week or so of the campaign.
Lest we forget another President who has their name on MANY things, John F. Kennedy...and Kennedy didn't even serve out 1 full term as a President, so we don't know exactly what would've happened after 4 or 8 years, but I digress...
I think historical perspective would say "while there are candidates who have captivated and motivated their base into a devoted following, none have ever created such a cult of personality before ever setting foot into the Presidency."
It's very disturbing to me, but I've never been a big fan of a leader who swoons the masses with lots of rhetoric and little else to go on (you can point to his plans, but you can't point to much he's actually done in politics).
Also, I think it's dangerous for a nation to get caught up in the cult of personality, because it then creates the mob mentality against the voice of the opposition.
I don't know, it just reminds me of kids singing for the "dear leader" like they did for Stalin, Mao, Hitler, etc...
It's good to be back, Adam.
See, RD, that's the kind of attack crap I was referring to. I just asked a question.
I'm not even trying to make a "distraction", I want a simple answer to the question...one that you obviously could not provide.
Stop engaging in pointless smear tactics? I wasn't even starting, my friend.
The songs of children for "our leader" in the vein of what was done for Obama is scary if you look at the history of the last 100 years and the context of similar images.
But what does Obama know about the economy? There's already stats out that disprove his "tax cuts for 95% of middle and working class families", even Factcheck.org has disproved that statement...so really, how is limiting a company's ability to grow and produce jobs by taxing them productive for the economy?
Did you forget who you were talking to? I remember you being much more diplomatic and ready to have civil discourse...now you're just attacking me for asking a question of Obama supporters (not independents). I was giving you a forum to make a civilized response.
Instead, you give me the same ol' "smear tactics" line we've heard time and time again from the left.
And I have yet to hear "ugly threats" come from the mouths of John McCain and Sarah Palin...so try again, JC.
I would add, Phil, that the anger coming from the right at this moment (today's editorial page of the DNR, for example) is also disturbing.
Granted, the left was angry in 2004, but we thought we would win ... and the shock of losing was large.
The right, meanwhile, knows weeks ahead of time they are likely to lose ... and without the shock of losing the resentment, powerlessness and fear evident now (and among the left in 2004) will have to find another outlet.
Now you know why I'm considering a jump to a third party.
Interesting that nobody has noticed that my endorsements column is not all Republican...
Post a Comment