I hope that all of us that can will do our best to help Hillary Clinton pay off ALL of her campaign debt quickly. She deserves that. You all knew Hillary, and Bill would go out on a limb for us if they felt they had too. That's what they do. :-) As I said before Hillary Clinton was STUNNING!!!

You witnessed the greatest political campaign struggle in American history. One for the textbooks, and the history books. Hillary Clinton fought her heart out against all odds to win for all of the American people. While at the same time doing her best to prepare Sen. Barack Obama to win in November if he was the nominee. STUNNING!!! WELL DONE HILLARY CLINTON. WELL DONE! Your AMAZING! :-)

Sen. Obama could not have had a better opponent than Hillary Clinton. Nor could he have had a better opponent to prepare him for the battle royal to come against John McCain and the Republicans ahead of the November elections. Hillary Clinton was like a big Mama cat determined to teach her kitten how to hunt, and hang with the big dogs for the fights ahead. The Clinton's have won the Whitehouse twice before. They know what it will take.

Hillary Clinton took Sen. Obama to every brawl, and cat fight she could find for him to develop his fight, and his chops. She even let her men (President Clinton, Governor Rendell, and many others) loose on Sen. Obama a little bit. So as to give Sen. Obama a taste of just how rough, and tough the big boys will be to do battle with. :-)

From sea to shining sea and US territories Hillary Clinton took Sen. Obama to see all of America. To meet, and greet all it's people. And to ask for their votes and support, which he will need if he becomes President. She took him to see what he will be fighting for. And to see what she and President Clinton have fought so heroically for over so many years. Sen. Obama could not have ask for any better. Nor had any better teachers.

Bill Clinton, Chelsea, Mrs. Rodham, and the whole Clinton team were magnificent. They really showed their metal. BRAVO! TEAM CLINTON... BRAVO!

And YOU! my fellow Americans. I'm so proud of you. And proud to be one of you. You showed what you are made of. And what makes America so great. You never gave up on your Champion Hillary Clinton. Time, and time again you eagerly waited your turn to vote for Hillary Clinton. To raise her up and pass her along down the line to the rest of your waiting fellow Americans.

You never gave up on her. Just as Hillary Clinton never gave up on you. No matter how many times they counted her out. No matter how many times her detractors, and attackers brutally knocked her down. You knew she would get back up and get after it. And when she did you were ready to support her. This is your role model America. AMERICA LOVES A FIGHTER. AMERICA UNDERSTANDS A FIGHTER. AMERICA IS A FIGHTER. I'M PROUD OF YOU AMERICA!

Sen. Clinton looked a little tired her first day back at work in the senate after her history making heroic campaign. She has good reason to be tired. Doesn't she America. But with time and good attention to the basics she, and you will recover. The basics are good well balanced nutrition, hydration, rest, exercise, recreation, POSITIVE! emotional support, and time (the greatest healer of all).

Y'all be good to President Clinton. I never saw a man fight so hard for a woman, and the American people as President Clinton fought for Hillary Clinton, and you. It's going to take Bill a while. No one except Hillary Clinton could have fought any harder than President Clinton did for you.

I imagine President Clinton still remembers how the American people wailed, reached, and cried out for him as he took that last flight home as your President on Air Force One after the 2000 elections. Yes, many of us knew back then what was coming for the American people under a republican administration. Back to living like dumb animals again. Fighting over territory, and scraps of meat. You are dieing like fly's now. Republicans too. But it's ok because some people are making a lot of money off of your needless deaths. :-(

As always, Hillary Clinton, and President Clinton did their best for all of us. It was an EPIC!

YOU MADE US VERY PROUD HILLARY CLINTON! HOLD YOUR HEAD HIGH :-)

WE LOVE YOU. AND ADMIRE YOU...

jacksmith... Working Class :-)

jacksmith (#1), gee, um, thanks!

To the author,
I can't get past the paragraph where you site, that ACT was fined for hiring criminals. I checked the links in your paragraph,they prove the statement to be misleading and false.They were fined because of the way they raised money, and there was heresay by someone else about some groups possibly hiring criminals. But I guess you must know this because you wrote the article??
I could use this example to show whats wrong with blog opinions, in my media class :-) Anyway Have a nice day.

Leigh (#3), I hope the content of a single paragraph doesn't distract from the overall point that hiring Patrick Gaspard does not signal a new kind of outsider politics.

In fact, I changed the URL at the last minute, and probably shouldn't have. Nevertheless, I wouldn't call it "heresay [sic] by someone else about some groups possibly hiring criminals," since it was an independent AP investigation, and ACT acknowledged the fact. Mo Elleithee, a Washington-based spokesman for the group "confirmed that felons have been hired in Missouri, Florida and Ohio and said it is possible that felons have been hired in the other 14 states in which it's conducting its drive."

Still, while your specific claim with regard to ACT hiring felons is wrong, you are right that the article is currently misworded as well, stating that the fine was the result of hiring felons, when in fact it was for mismanaging funds.

I will look into revising that paragraph. Thanks!

In the interest of an audit trail, the paragraph referenced by Leigh above originally described ACT as "a 527 group that was fined $775,000 by the federal government for hiring criminals convicted of sex offenses, assault and burglary to collect personal information for voter registration."

This has now been changed to describe ACT as "a 527 group that hired criminals convicted of sex offenses, assault and burglary to collect personal information for voter registration, and was fined $775,000 by the federal government for misusing campaign funds."

I regret the error.

Are the author's attacks on Sen. Obama legitimate or just another racist attack? It's obvious that he is holding Obama to a higher standard because of his race! This is what Obama warned us about..the Republicans playing the race card!

For too long blacks have had to deal with life on the white man's terms. Now that a brother is threatening the white man's power..they resort to racial attacks.

Obama is for real change. The black community will finally have "real power" to take back what is rightfully ours and change the white power structure in this country.

Jamal

Jamal (#6), "the race card," really? Did you read the article at all?

I'm measuring Senator Obama by the standard he claims for himself, and although Senator McCain isn't the focus of this article, I can tell you: McCain is also a politician, with the same record of inconsistencies and flip-flops and pandering. The only reason this article is about Senator Obama and not Senator McCain is that Senator McCain doesn't pretend to be a new kind of politician.

For what it's worth, I like Senator Obama.

Phillp (#6),

Dont be so condescending...yea..next youl be telling me that "some of my best friends are black!"...

Obama didnt set a standard for himself the white polical power structure has set one for the white politician and one for the black polician...

Thats the facts of being black in America. When Obama wins he will right the course and open up opportunities that we have been deprived of for generations...education, jobs and wealth...

Get ready America..theres gonna be a new Sherif in town...

Jamal

Jamal (#8), I'm glad you're happy with Senator Obama.

jacksmith (1)

What are you talking about. The Clintons did everything they could to scare the white folks of Obama being the Big Black Boogey Man!

Hillary insinuating that "hard working Americans" would not support Obama because he was Black was the lowest of lows...pure racism...

How can you support the Clintons for trying to keep Obama a proud black man from what America owes him and us!!!

Jamal

Just so everyone is aware, 'jacksmith' is a political shill. He has posted the above comment verbatim at least twice on Blogcritics and, as you will see if you Google a phrase or two from it, on several other sites as well.

Dr Dreadful (#11), it's certainly unrelated to this article, but actually, most of the comments so far have been. :-)

Jamal, this article demonstrates pretty clearly that Obama set his own standards by declaring himself a different kind of candidate. He has subsequently done all the little political tricks that weigh down our current system of politics.

Does Leigh teach a media class?

Baroinus 13,

Applying the oppresive white mans social system's rules and standards to a man of color is just another form of racism. Why must you blame and indict Obama because he is doing what he needs to do according to the white mans political rules?

Our peoples suffering at the rules and law of the white man is just another example of the social injustice in this country. Obama is playing the way the brothers need to play...this is our turn..this is the pay back...we are going to get our reparation for the years of misery and dispair.

Jamal

Jamal (#14), I'm neither blaming Senator Obama, nor indicting him. I fully expect him to play politics, because indeed, it's what any man or woman must do to get ahead in the political arena.

The only thing I'm calling him out on is his claim to *not* be playing political games, when it is obvious that he is. His claim to be above the fray is what misleads people into placing heavy expectations on him, which will lead to disappointment.

In fact, Senator Obama is a politician, and a good one. He has a reasonably consistent set of guiding principles, and is well-advised on what to say in order to appeal to the widest group possible without entirely compromising those principles. Those are the hallmarks of a good politician, and they've been characteristic of Senator Obama's career in Illinois as well as his Senate campaign and now his Presidential campaign. I expect that he will be our next President, in part because of his political savvy.

I hope, however, that voters walk into the ballot booth with eyes wide open, realizing that they're not choosing between a man and a superman, or between a politician and a savior, or between an insider and an outsider.

We will be choosing between a Democrat and a Republican. Both have great faith in the power of government to do good. (I have a slight libertarian bent myself, but neither candidate fits that bill.) We will choose between a left-wing politician and a right-wing politician. Neither is going to lead a great revolution, not in four or eight years. Certainly Senator Obama would break some new ground, and I for one would be quite happy about that.

If skin color is (apparently) the one issue you care about this election cycle, then more power to you. I'm glad you have that option this time around. I hope you're not disappointed when President Obama turns out to be human.

Jamal, I'm with Phillip on this one. If Obama wants to play by the rules of "payback", let him campaign on it. How about a new set of ads, with Obama complaining about white oppression?

Is there a white man's energy bill, or a racist Cuba policy? If so, Obama shouldn't have agreed to it in the first place, or shouldn't have switched sides to support it. Tell me one of the items on Phillip's list that Obama did because of the unfair burden of the black man. If not, you shouldn't inject race into the matter.

Perhaps all that Jamal is trying to point out is that he views the world in black and white only. And I suppose that Obama should also be lumped within that same paradigm, as Obama has a portion of mother Africa flowing in his DNA.

So do I.

And I'm proud of it, not victimized by it. I also have Chinese (paid slave laborers for the railroad). Of which I am also proud of. And of course some kind of wierd white dude is in there too, a whoremonger no doubt letting off a little steam in a cat house some where in a California boom town. Maybe some Yuma, or Apache. But... I don't care. That's who I am. I am just glad to living in the U.S.A. and not some back water malarial infested civil war zone, with absolutely no income or anyway out save a gruesome death at the hands of an opposing warloard.

Ain't that right Brother Jamal?

Ain't it?

Obama is going to do just fine, and I really don't think he needs your help. Sorry, but you are just too negative and from what you are blowing, you're stuck in the muck. Shuck it and live a real life. Not one you've been told is all your worth living... Jesse and Al and all that twisted hype is dragging you down. Sadly they're making money off it.

Do you think Obama feels that way about himself? He wouldn't be where he is today if he was.

Obama is moving forward, you need to move with him. He's not being "too white" he's making his way in this world. Believe it.

Condor,

Are you for real? Are you posting in "Black Face"? Obama knows what the deal is. Hes South Side Before the white democratic leaders chased the Rev. Wright away the real story was playin out.

So dont try and do the work of the white man and shut the brother up! I know whats about to happen this is years in the making. The payback is a bitch!

Jamal

EWO (#19), that's the kind of stuff that I consider nonsense. It's relatively easy to pull images and events out of context to make someone look bad.

Please, don't believe the nonsense.

Jamal may be for real or Jamal may be a ringer.

Ya pays your money and takes your choice.

Too rich Jamal, go pull your oftah crap on some other fish.

Have fun in your little world. It wasn't big enough for me.

BTW it's brown face

So he didn't put his hand over his heart.

So fucking what?

What does that prove?

Nothing.

But all the furor raised over this sure does prove that a lot of people in this country are ignorant, and that "patriotism" [really] is "the last refuge of a scoundrel."

You believe in "patriotism," EWO? Go volunteer at a VA hospital.

Phillip, exceptionally well written artice, and your follow up comments have been measured and calmly convincing.

I too expect a politician to play by the rules of the political arena in order to get elected. Although I do like Senator Obama and hope he gets into the white house, I don't expect miracles to happen.

I'll be watching to see if he assembles a crew like Cheney and Rumsfeld. That would truly signal that the fix is in and there is no hope for anything but the status quo that we've had for eight years.

I have the personal audacity to hope that this isn't the case. But I won't be holding my breath.

Thanks for taking the time to pen this article.

Obama's middle name is Hussein.

His father was a Muslim (and a polygamist/bigamist).

"Obama Sr. grew up in Nyangoma-Kogelo. At 18, he married a young woman named Kezia in a tribal ceremony. They had four children, two of them after he returned to Kenya from the United States. He never divorced Kezia, who now lives in Bracknell, England."

"On February 2, 1961, Obama Sr. married a fellow student, Ann Dunham in Maui, Hawaii. She did not know that he already had a wife in Kenya."

His mother was a left-wing atheist who got knocked up before their (shotgun) wedding.

"Their son, Barack Obama, Jr., was born on August 4, 1961." [Barack Obama was born just six months after their marriage. Therefore, his mother was already knocked up when they married.]

"Dunham's best friend in high school has said that she "touted herself as an atheist, and it was something she'd read about and could argue."

"[S]he was a lonely witness for secular humanism, a soldier for New Deal, Peace Corps, position-paper liberalism."

His step-father was a Muslim.

"Religious beliefs: Muslim"

He lived in Indonesia (a Muslim country) for four years as a youth. He was registered there as a Muslim.

"Obama's four years as a child in Indonesia underscore how dramatically his background differs from that of past presidential hopefuls... "

"His former Roman Catholic and Muslim teachers, along with two people who were identified by Obama's grade-school teacher as childhood friends, say Obama was registered by his family as a Muslim at both of the schools he attended."

In Indonesia, he hung out at the Islamic Center, prayed to Allah at the local Mosque, and studied the Koran at school.

"As a boy in Indonesia, Barack Obama crisscrossed the religious divide ... In the neighborhood mosque, he bowed to Allah."

"That [Muslim] registration meant that during the third and fourth grades, Obama learned about Islam for two hours each week in religion class."

"The childhood friends say Obama sometimes went to Friday prayers at the local mosque."

"In his autobiography, Dreams From My Father, Obama briefly mentions Koranic study and describes his public school, which accepted students of all religions, as "a Muslim school.""

""His mother often went to the church, but Barry was Muslim. He went to the mosque," Adi said. "I remember him wearing a sarong.""

"The statement added that as a child, Obama had spent time in the neighborhood's Islamic center."

He also visited Pakistan while in college.

"In 1981 -- the year Obama transferred from Occidental College to Columbia University -- Obama visited his mother and sister Maya in Indonesia. After that visit, Obama traveled to Pakistan with a friend from college whose family was from there. The Obama campaign says Obama was in Pakistan for about three weeks..."

Obama's half-brother believes he is a Muslim, and showed photographs of Obama wearing Muslim garb on a trip to Kenya.

Obama's "church" was led by a radical anti-White and anti-American "Reverend" who was once a Black Muslim.

"Trinity United Church of Christ adopted the Black Value System written by the Manford Byrd Recognition Committee chaired by Vallmer Jordan in 1981. We believe in the following 12 precepts and covenantal statements. These Black Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever Blacks are gathered. They must reflect on the following concepts:

1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of "Middleclassness"
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System."

"After many lectures like this, Obama decided to take a second look at Wright's church. Older pastors warned him that Trinity was for "Buppies"--black urban professionals--and didn't have enough street cred. But Wright was a former Muslim and black nationalist who had studied at Howard and Chicago, and Trinity's guiding principles--what the church calls the "Black Value System"--included a "Disavowal of the Pursuit of 'Middleclassness.'""

The official church newsletter gave a "lifetime achievement award" to Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation Of Islam.

"Barack Obama's longtime minister, mentor, and sounding board has been a key supporter of Louis Farrakhan and last month honored the Nation of Islam leader for lifetime achievement.

Farrakhan has repeatedly made hate-filled statements targeting Jews, whites, America, and homosexuals. He has called whites "blue-eyed devils" and the "anti-Christ."

Obama's minister and friend, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. and his Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, honored Farrakhan at a gala, bestowing on him its Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Lifetime Achievement Trumpeteer award.

Obama has said he found religion through Wright in the 1980s and consulted him before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Wright before announcing his candidacy last year."

Obama attended Farrakhan's "Million Man March."

"In 1995, along with other prominent black leaders such as Al Sharpton and Barack Obama, Farrakhan helped lead the Million Man March on Washington."

Obama was endorsed by the Muslim terrorist group Hamas, and his campaign manager accepted the endorsement.

"Hamas has endorsed Barack Obama for President. Yousef said, "We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election." Why? "He has a vision to change America.""

"Obama Campaign "Flattered" by Hamas Endorsement"

Do you "progressives" still feel comfortable supporting this guy?

And keep in mind, I left quite a few things out, such as Obama's friendship with an unrepentant left-wing domestic terrorist named William Ayers, and his close ties to the Syrian-born Tony Rezko, who was recently convicted of fraud and bribery. Or his wife's anti-American comments and anti-White senior thesis.

So he didn't put his hand over his heart.

So fucking what?

What does that prove?

Nothing.

******But why wouldn't he? The default position, what the vast majority of people do during the national anthem/pledge of allegiance, is to place their hands over their hearts. Obama chose not to do so. Why? Was he sending a signal to somebody? You may have noticed that all the America-haters overseas are just drooling over this guy. Why is that?******

But all the furor raised over this sure does prove that a lot of people in this country are ignorant, and that "patriotism" [really] is "the last refuge of a scoundrel."

******You don't even understand the meaning of this quote, do you? It doesn't mean that all patriots are a bunch of scoundrels; it means that scoundrels will wrap themselves in the flag in order to appear to have at least one redeeming quality.******

You believe in "patriotism," EWO? Go volunteer at a VA hospital.

******Let me see if I understand your line of reasoning here. Everybody who doesn't volunteer at a VA hospital is unpatriotic, BUT placing your hand on your crotch during the national anthem/pledge of allegiance isn't at all indicative of a lack of patriotism. Does that about sum your view up?******

EWO (#19), that's the kind of stuff that I consider nonsense. It's relatively easy to pull images and events out of context to make someone look bad.

Please, don't believe the nonsense.

******You called it "nonsense" twice. Yet there is photographic proof of it (indeed, it's also on video). And the snopes article you linked to stated that the claim was TRUE. I guess you have an interesting definition of the word "nonsense" is all I can say!******

The default position, what the vast majority of people do during the national anthem/pledge of allegiance, is to place their hands over their hearts.

A strange American custom which, if you watch when the national anthems are played at international soccer matches and Olympic medal ceremonies, almost no other nationalities follow. There's no law that says you have to put your hand over your heart and trying to portray someone as unpatriotic for not doing so is, quite frankly, pathetic.

You don't even understand the meaning of this quote, do you? It doesn't mean that all patriots are a bunch of scoundrels...

I think we all understand the quote a lot better than you do. You appear to be living it.

Everybody who doesn't volunteer at a VA hospital is unpatriotic, BUT placing your hand on your crotch during the national anthem/pledge of allegiance isn't at all indicative of a lack of patriotism. Does that about sum your view up?

Volunteering is practical. Any idiot can put their hand on their chest. That's the difference.

I would imagine you are also one of those folks who gets upset when someone doesn't take down the flag in their yard at night, has a conniption if someone criticizes the president*, and would disown your own mother if it turned out she didn't know all the words to 'God Bless America'...


_{* Unless it's a Democratic president, of course.}

In my capacity as Assistant Comments Editor, I have deleted a couple of chain e-mail type anti-Obama comments from this thread. They add nothing to the discussion here and would, if they were allowed to remain, be an embarrassment to the site.

For those who might be interested, however, they can be found on any number of conservative websites or by Googling the following phrases:

"As your future President, I want to thank my supporters for your mindless support of me"...

"WE HAVE SEEN PICTURES OF HIS AFRICAN FAMILY"...

To all commenters: please try to restrict your commenting to your original thoughts, if you have any.

Thank you.

'A strange American custom which, if you watch when the national anthems are played at international soccer matches and Olympic medal ceremonies, almost no other nationalities follow. There's no law that says you have to put your hand over your heart and trying to portray someone as unpatriotic for not doing so is, quite frankly, pathetic.'

There's no law, no. I don't think anybody suggested that there was, either. Way to attack a strawman!

You still haven't explained why he wouldn't do it. It doesn't take much effort to place your hand over your heart for a couple minutes during the national anthem. Pretty much everyone else does it (at least in the United States; I understand that Europeans and Canadians are post-patriotic, self-loathing socialists).

It's downright abnormal for a major politician to refuse to place his/her hand on his/her heart during the national anthem. So why did Barack Obama take this unusual step? Doesn't he feel the normal love and affection for his country that most Americans do? Is he so naive and clueless and inexperienced that he didn't understand that this would offend some people?

Will be bother to salute back to the troops when they salute him, should be become Commander In Chief? Or is that just another silly, stupid, meaningless little tradition that he won't bother with, and only right-wing crazies will dare to mention?

'I think we all understand the quote a lot better than you do. You appear to be living it.'

Is this how you debate people? With personal attacks? Is that the best you can do?

Do you honestly believe that Samuel Johnson's quote was meant to suggest that all patriots are scoundrels? Is that your position?

Here's a website about Samuel Johnson that briefly discusses the meaning of the quote: "Boswell assures us that Johnson was not indicting patriotism in general, only false patriotism."

Does that make Obama a false patriot, now that he's wearing a flag pin on his lapel again, after having received criticism for not wearing it? Maybe Samuel Johnson was talking about people like Obama!

'Volunteering is practical. Any idiot can put their hand on their chest. That's the difference.'

You're actually making the point for those you disagree with.

Volunteering takes a lot of effort. Most people have busy lives and aren't going to take time out of their day to volunteer. I don't think that makes them all a bunch of unpatriotic jerks, though.

HOWEVER, placing your hand on your heart takes essentially zero effort. Anybody can do it, and the overwhelming majority of people have no problem doing it. That's why it's so bizarre that Obama would refuse to do so. That's why it's so inexplicable. That's why a lot of people are questioning his patriotism.

If he won't even lift his hand in a simple sin of respect for his country, will be bother to do the really difficult things for his country?

'I would imagine you are also one of those folks who gets upset when someone doesn't take down the flag in their yard at night, has a conniption if someone criticizes the president, and would disown your own mother if it turned out she didn't know all the words to 'God Bless America'...'

You're certainly full of assumptions...or at least full of something! =}

'We will choose between a left-wing politician and a right-wing politician.'

No, we will choose between an inexperienced leftist and a moderate war hero. The only "right-wing politician" in the race is (arguably) Bob Barr.

When Obama brags about being a "community organizer" what does he mean by that?

"[Obama] cut his ideological teeth working with ACORN as a "community organizer" and legal representative."

[AIS, it would help readers a great deal if you would please provide your references as properly-formatted HTML links. If you're not sure how to do that, there's a brief but good tutorial here. Thanks - Assistant Comments Editor]

"Last July, ACORN settled the largest case of voter fraud in the history of Washington State. Seven ACORN workers had submitted nearly 2,000 bogus voter-registration forms. According to case records, they flipped through phone books for names to use on the forms, including "Leon Spinks," "Frekkie Magoal" and "Fruto Boy Crispila.""

"ACORN has been implicated in similar voter-fraud schemes in Missouri, Ohio, and at least 12 other states. The Wall Street Journal noted: "In Ohio in 2004, a worker for one affiliate was given crack cocaine in exchange for fraudulent registrations that included underage voters, dead voters and pillars of the community named Mary Poppins, Dick Tracy and Jive Turkey."

So, in Obama's youth, he was doing cocaine and working for a corrupt organization that is notorious for voter fraud - and doing so in Cook County!

That's the New Politics of Hope and Change!

By the way, Obama admitted to doing cocaine in his 20s, but did he ever specify if it was powder or rock form? In other words, was Obama a crack-head?

I don't know why he didn't put his hand over his heart and quite frankly, like Clavos, I don't care. It's unimportant. For that matter, it doesn't take much effort not to do it, either.

And it's not abnormal, just unusual.

I say it shows independence of thought - not just robotically doing it because it's what everybody does.

I imagine he's now wearing a flag lapel pin in the hope that people like you will finally stop constantly bugging him about it.

My dig about the Johnson quote may have been personal, but it was not gratuitous. It was based on what I have observed of your views, which seem to hold ceremonial symbols and rituals to be of a rather unrealistic level of importance. I know perfectly well what Johnson meant, and he seems to have you in his crosshairs quite neatly.

If he won't even lift his hand in a simple sin [sic] of respect for his country, will be bother to do the really difficult things for his country?

Well, why don't you try to find out? You claim to be worried about the detrimental effect of an Obama presidency, yet instead of addressing his political positions you quibble about flag pins and salutes. Is that really the best you can do?

Michelle Obama's views on "Whitey".

""It is possible that Black individuals either chose to or felt pressured to come together . . . because of the belief that Blacks must join in solidarity to combat a White oppressor," she wrote."

Hilarious. A bunch of black students who are attending an elite Ivy League university (many of whom almost certainly were admitted only because of watered-down Affirmative Action admission standards) are bitching about "the White oppressor."

This is going to be our First Lady?

"You still haven't explained why he wouldn't do it."

Not going to, either. It's meaningless; the gesture AND your point.

"Here's a website about Samuel Johnson that briefly discusses the meaning of the quote: "Boswell assures us that Johnson was not indicting patriotism in general, only false patriotism.""

Exactly.

And making a big deal out of someone not placing their hand over their heart during the singing of a song is the very definition of false patriotism.

"Volunteering takes a lot of effort. Most people have busy lives and aren't going to take time out of their day to volunteer."

Again, exactly. Which is why volunteering in support of our wounded veterans at the VA hospitals is a far more meaningful and truly patriotic act than wearing a cheap, tacky (probably chinese-made) flag pin or putting your hand over your heart.

'Well, why don't you try to find out? You claim to be worried about the detrimental effect of an Obama presidency, yet instead of addressing his political positions you quibble about flag pins and salutes. Is that really the best you can do?'

Well, that's sort of difficult to do, since he has virtually no track record or paper trail of votes, due to his almost complete lack of political experience. And a lot of his stated positions have, shall we say, evolved over the last year or so since he began running for President.

However, from what I've seen and heard, an Obama Presidency would have the following features (although this is entirely open to further flip-flopping and revision, which would of course be totally ignored by the folks in the mainstream media, who are completely in love with him):

- Higher marginal tax rates

- Higher capital gains tax rates (even if that results is LESS government revenues)

- Immediately begin withdrawing from Iraq, regardless of the situation on the ground, and despite the fact that we are now winning there thanks to the Surge (that he opposed)

- Opposition to national missile defense

- Cuts in defense spending (especially weapons programs)

- Open borders policy (although this differs very little from McCain)

- No drilling for oil or natural gas off the Pacific coast, Atlantic coast, or in the Gulf of Mexico

- No drilling for oil or natural gas in ANWR

- No new nuclear power plants

- No reduction (temporary or permanent) in the federal gasoline tax; in fact, the Democrats in the Congress support an additional 50 cent tax on every gallon of gasoline

- Ambivalence about the meaning of the Second Amendment

- More American tax-dollars going to foreign aid

- Moving towards socialized medicine

- Talks/negotiations with Chavez, the Castro Brothers, and Ahmadinejad, without preconditions.

- Support for partial-birth abortion

- Support for activist federal judges (including Supreme Court justices)

- Increasing the ceiling on the Social Security/Medicare (FICA) Tax (which I think is actually defensible, although it completely undermines the rationale behind the payroll tax)

- Bombing Pakistan, a nuclear-armed, quasi-democratic ally

- Expanding Affirmative Action to include socio-economic status, while keeping race/ethnicity as a legitimate variable for consideration

Do I have to go on?

"Is he so naive and clueless and inexperienced that he didn't understand that this would offend some people?"

Maybe. I know I didn't realize some people were so petty and stupid that this was an issue to them. Although I will concede that I am unaware of how a gesture that takes essentially zero effort will help the country get energy independent or fight the war on terror.

"By the way, Obama admitted to doing cocaine in his 20s, but did he ever specify if it was powder or rock form?"

Nope, he's taking a play from Bush's handbook.

#32 & #34 -

I see neither of you can rationally explain why he wouldn't place his hand over his heart as a simple sign of respect during the singing of the national anthem. Instead, you'd rather kill the messenger by attacking the patriotism of the people who point it out.

Is that how you learned to debate? When you can't answer an opponent's reasonable question, you attack them personally?

Tell me, if John McCain picked his nose and scratched his ass every time the national anthem was played, do you think it would be illegitimate for the Democrats to point that out? How is grabbing your crotch any less disrespectful than that?

People who don't like to see or hear certain questions asked or certain facts pointed out love to try to shout down the folks who dare to mention the unmentionable. I wonder what you are afraid of?

'Again, exactly. Which is why volunteering in support of our wounded veterans at the VA hospitals is a far more meaningful and truly patriotic act than wearing a cheap, tacky (probably Chinese-made) flag pin or putting your hand over your heart.'

Yes, of course it would be more meaningful. But Obama has done neither!

If he's not going to volunteer at a VA hospital (as 99% of Americans don't either), then at the very least he could place his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegiance or the national anthem. It's a basic sign of respect for your country.

Tell me, do you guys even think it's POSSIBLE to not be patriotic? Y or N?

Do you think it's important for the leader of a country to love his/her country? Y or N?

What would a candidate have to do, in your opinion, to be considered unpatriotic? Burning the flag? Spitting on a war veteran? Bombing federal government buildings? Saying that you've never been proud of your country except really recently? Going to a church with a raving anti-American lunatic for a pastor for about two decades? What qualifies an indivudla as unpatriotic in your minds?

'Maybe. I know I didn't realize some people were so petty and stupid that this was an issue to them.'

Wow, ANOTHER personal attack for having a different opinion. You progressives really don't tolerate dissent very well, do you? =}

'Although I will concede that I am unaware of how a gesture that takes essentially zero effort will help the country get energy independent or fight the war on terror.'

Did somebody claim that it would? I don't recall reading that on here, and I certainly didn't write it myself. Or do you just enjoy setting up little strawmen in order to knock them down? =}

Let's cut the crap. Everyone knows that conservatives are more patriotic than progressives. In fact, many progressives will even admit that they find patriotism distasteful. They believe that patriotism = nationalism = jingoism = fascism = evil.

I remember reading an essay in The Nation (a left-wing magazine) that was written in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. The female writer was wringing her hands about the fact that her teenage daughter had bought an American flag decal to put on her car (if I remember correctly). And the writer was troubled about this because she openly admitted that what the flag symbolized to her was all the evils of America - slavery, war, genocide, etc.

Of course, the flag is merely a symbol of America. And if one looks at a symbol of America and automatically thinks of all kinds of awful things and zero good things, that's a pretty sure sign that the person in question doesn't particularly like the country. (Does that qualify as unpatriotic?)

The right goes to rallies in support of the troops. The left goes to rallies in opposition to the battles the troops are fighting. During these anti-war rallies, the American flag is often burned and the troops are sometimes called baby-killers and the like. (Does that qualify as unpatriotic?)

Of course, not all Democrats are "progressives" and not all progressives are unpatriotic. But only a blind fool would deny that there is a strong anti-American sentiment among the far-left.

Is it possible that Obama was signaling something to these far-left voters with his refusal to wear the flag pin on his lapel? Is it possible that he was secretly pandering to these "post-patriotic" voters when he didn't put his hand on his heart during the pledge of allegiance or the national anthem? If so, might that possibly explain why he is so strongly supported by the left-wing bloggers and the far-left activists?

The far-left makes up just a minority of all Democrats, but they are an influential and outspoken minority. They also vote in large numbers in caucuses. Didn't Obama do much better than Hillary in caucuses than in primaries?

Will any of you address any of these points? Or will you just call me stupid and a false patriot some more?

Did Michelle Obama get a massive raise because of her husband's job? Is this Change We Can Believe In?

STORY -

"in the list of earmarks he requested, $1 million was requested for the construction of a new hospital pavilion at the University Of Chicago. The request was put in in 2006.

You know who works for the University of Chicago Hospital?

Michelle Obama. She's vice president of community affairs.

As Byron noted, "In 2006, the Chicago Tribune reported that Mrs. Obama's compensation at the University of Chicago Hospital, where she is a vice president for community affairs, jumped from $121,910 in 2004, just before her husband was elected to the Senate, to $316,962 in 2005, just after he took office.""

"There's the malicious lie-filled story that claims he's an America-hating Muslim, but that is completely untrue, and I'm tired of seeing it in my email inbox."

Then, delete it.

Personally I've always thought that gesture of placing your hand on your heart during the national anthem was extremely cheesy and fake. It has nothing to do with love of one's country, it's simply meant to look "good". Totally cynical in other words.

I enjoyed the artical and then started reading some of the comments. It would appear that some on this thread think we need affirmative action in presidential campaigns...it's nice that the brother up there in the previous comments is already calling the country racist, even before his boy Obama loses. What's next, Rodney King style riots when he loses in November?

CR - some people are taught in this country to place their hand on their heart during the anthem and the pledge, it's not cheesy, it's just what we're taught when we're young. Like taking off your hat for the anthem. Sort of like that cheesy way your military salutes, you know, palm up. I was taught that "we" didn't salute that way, because it indicated that we'd never lost a war. I'm pretty sure that's BS, but that doesn't make it "cheesy". Of course, for liberals, love of country is something to loathe.

And they call us bitter!

Hi Andy,

I'm not convinced that Obama will lose to that doddery old dead man walking they call McCain. Is he from the family that make fast food, McCain Oven Chips and the like? I assume you get that stuff in the USA?

There is no comparison or relationship to the way that particular armies salute and something that "some people" are taught to do.

The USA has never lost a war? Try saying that in Saigon!

There's nothing wrong with loving your country - or even others too. I love England, Belgium and Spain - and the USA. That doesn't mean that gesture isn't cheesy or that I'm bitter about anything. Please try to avoid lazy stereotyping like that - it's bad for your credibility! ;-)

Matthew (#43) Hee! I've deleted seven so far this year, and yet every few weeks, there I see it again. Heck, there's a variant at comment #24 above. It makes me feel sick to see it, honestly. Just disgusting.

Oh yeah, and it's "article", not "artical". Didn't you learn Inglish proper?

Where's Clavos the Grammar Nazi when you need him?

Phillip, I considered deleting #24 but eventually decided his obvious prejudice spoke louder than his actual words.

AMABO (#26) you've made your point now. I suggest finding a new point.

I called it nonsense because I've read the entire Snopes page, not just the first paragraph. I wonder if you've read this entire article, all five pages? In addition to the single event at which Senator Obama is recorded without his hand over his heart, there are also several videos of him on that same Snopes *with* his hand over his heart, and leading the pldege of allegiance, and so on.

So it's nonsense because, as I said, it was an isolated incident which proves nothing, and he's quite willing and happy to perform whatever patriotic rituals you require.

It's also nonsense because it doesn't matter. We elect a President to make good decisions in times of crisis and to advocate for legislation we support, not to attend minor league baseball games.

If you are unhappy with Senator Obama as President, I would hope you would be unhappy because of the policies for which he advocates, not anything else. He's not a manchurian candidate, nor a Muslim ("Not that there's anything wrong with that"), nor anything else: he's an American who loves his country and thinks that a generally left-wing approach to problems is best.

Senator McCain is an America who loves his country and thinks that a generall right-wing approach to problems is best.

BTW, AmericaIsScrewed (#30), Senator McCain has an 82.4% lifetime conservative rating from the American Conservative Union. He's pretty right-wing. A willingness to work with the other party on a couple of high-profile issues doesn't make one a super-moderate.

Christopher, no problem. It's an email paste job, I'm pretty sure. Very similar to some of the emails I've seen. As long as there's just one, that side of things is represented.

Too bad the author didn't even read the first two paragraphs of my article. I debated whether to even put that in, wondering whether even saying that would contribute to the problem. Would people think I was trying to subtly suggest bad things about Senator Obama? I finally decided to take that chance to proactively head off comments like, well, #24! I guess it didn't work.

You know, I knew after I hit enter that I had used the wrong artical, or article as the case may be. I figured Clavos to get me, but hey, he must be sleeping still.

I've never heard of any McCain food products, but things can be very regional here. On one side of the country, mayo is made by Bestfoods, on the other side of the country it's called Hellmans. It's the same stuff, just a different name. Sort of like politicians.

I did say that I thought that the reason I was taught to salute the way I did and the way your boys do was BS and you can bet your sweet arse I know about that last "police action". I think that's how they got away with that story when I bought it up, it wasn't a war, only a police action.

I also love plenty of countries. Most of the ones I've visited in fact. Can't say how I feel about yours, I've never been there. I like the people there well enough though. I think I had the most fun in the Netherlands, but after the first coffee shop visit, the rest of my time there seemed to be in a cloud....

I'm not convinced who will win in November either. But I keep reading how all you foreigners want Obama and that's reason enough to piss all of you off and vote McCain into office!!!

But that's just me, clinging to my guns and my antipathy towards people who aren't like me. Unfotunately for me, I quit clinging to religion a long time ago....so I also cling to porn as a replacement.

Andy, your "clinging to bitterness" is actually another one of those things that ends up defining a campaign, and I wish it didn't. I'm imagining an anti-Andy somewhere, dropping the c-word or references to "100 years" into conversation ironically, because doesn't it just sum up Senator McCain? I don't think it does, any more than "clinging to guns and religion" sums up Senator Obama.

Most of us are quick to summarize and label those not on our team, but we extend grace and understanding to those on our team. Perhaps it's because I'm not a reliable party voter, or perhaps it's because I felt alienated during the primary process when I feared it might actually end up a choice between Senator Clinton and Governor Romney and I might have to go with a third party again, but I find myself willing to extend that grace and understanding to both candidates this time around. It's nice!

After objective and dispassionate analysis, I do find that one candidate appeals to me more than the other on the basis of his positions, but that's just a reflect of my ideology, which leans more to one side than the other. I think both men are honorable public servants who believe in the power of government to do good.

Oh man... Are the comments by AmericaIsScrewed and AMAMBO typical of the crap that's going to fill the comments section of every political post on BC from now until November?

I visualize a room full of computers and minimum wage goofs copy/pasting right wing smears throughout the internet.

Time to find a other things to read till after the election.

Bennett (#54), don't forget "doddery old dead man walking they call McCain." The crap is not entirely limited to the right wing, it seems.

anti-Andy, I like that! Not sure I want to meet him, but I like it!

All I can say about the c-word is, I'm glad it's not a punishable offense, I'd be doing life, without parole if it was!!! Because I've been known to throw dumb in front of that word...and that can get you a severe ass whipping!

Honorable public servant...isn't that an oxymoron? I do agree with you though Phillip, that they do both seem to be pretty honorbale men, they just seem to have two completely different ideas of how this country should be run.

I don't follow any particular party either. I'm a registered independant and I vote based not on party, but on the ideas (and rhetoric) of whoever's running at the time.

But I also have my doubts about any candidate that comes from the "vote early vote often" part of the country that Obama hails from...I also lived in AZ for 4 years and know that every serious right winger has always hated McCain and that's reason enough for me to like him.

Go Navy!

Hang on a mo there, Mr Winn. I call foul. That's a fairly accurate, albeit comedic, description...

Many of the more vile descriptions of Senator Obama are technically accurate, but ungracious, just as your comment was.

Besides, I suspect Senator McCain's 93-year-old mother could kick your butt and mine. :-)

My grandmother moved to AZ when I was a kid. You see, what happens is, they get kinda pretrified in the AZ sun...and live forever!!!

Wasn't it Reagan who said, "I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience."?

Ungracious possibly, but vile? Lighten up, dude. There is precious little grace in politics. Do you really think he is young enough or strong enough to last 8 years in one of the toughest jobs in the world?

If his mum can kick anybody's butt I'd be very impressed...

CR - I know you'r aware of this, but I thought it worth pointing out anyway, we only elect presidents for four years in this country.

Yeah, I did know. So you see McCain as a placeholder 'til the Republicans come up with a better candidate, is that it?

I see EVERY president as a place holder until the one I really want comes along. Don't ask, I have no clue who he or she is! Knowing the way that candidates are vetted, I know it's not me!

I've deleted seven so far this year, and yet every few weeks, there I see it again. Heck, there's a variant at comment #24 above. It makes me feel sick to see it, honestly. Just disgusting.

It seems to me that the comment you're referring to has citations that back up the claims. What's so disgusting about facts?

OK Swabby, I'm awake now:

#56: It's independent, not "independant."

#61: It's you're, not "you'r," though you do get props for the apostrophe.

You're welcome.

Clavos the Grunt, aka The Grammar (and Spelling) Nazi

RJ (#64), let's start at the beginning of my article, at the top of the page. There's a link there in the second paragraph. The words "completely untrue" link to a Snopes.com page which dismantles the most common email about Senator Obama, which covers most of the false claims made above. Other Snopes pages dismantle the other claims.

A person can't help their middle name, who their father is, or what their family members think. I can't, you can't, Senator Obama can't. What isn't completely false in that comment is irrelevant.

Either you agree with Senator Obama's positions on the issues, or you don't. Therefore either vote for him, or don't. This other stuff, though, it's just ugliness.

Phillip,

I have no idea what sort of emails you are receiving. I don't know if they contain lies or not.

But I do know that what was written in comment #24 is factually true. Check the links yourself. Most of this stuff has been common knowledge among conservative bloggers for months now.

As for whether it's "relevant" or not, that's up for individual voters to decide, not a bunch of politically correct gatekeepers in the "objective" media.

I don't think stating easily-verifiable facts can be described as "ugliness." The Democrats are hitting McCain daily, mocking his age, questioning his health, attacking his military record, and running ads based on quotes of his that were taken completely out of context. Yet, oddly enough, there is very little outrage among "objective" media types over this. I wonder why the double-standard?

Phillip,

By the way, I thought this was a good article.

Look you! The you'r was a figner(intentional) f#@k of sorts...(thanks for the props)as to the others...you knew what I meant....we need a spell checker in the comments section! Not that it would help in most of my grammatical errors or the artical/article kind of stuff.


other than that...good morning Clav! Check that...good afternoon Clav!

You know what's really bad? I like McCain, but when I was in the navy, I really disliked almost every Academy grad I ever met! They all seemed to be so condescending it wasn't even funny! I may have to rethink this whole thing...

RJ, Thanks!

Please, try to understand what this looks like to someone who isn't deeply invested in partisan politics. You're upset about the daily attacks on your preferred candidate: "mocking his age [it is a verifiable fact that he's old], questioning his health [it is a verifiable fact that old people are more likely to have health problems, and it is a verifiable fact that Senator McCain has had some health problems], attacking his military record [based on verifiable facts], and running ads based on quotes of his [verifiable, factual quotes] that were taken completely out of context." You say that there is a double standard, and yet your own complaints are about things that meet the standard you defined.

Since it's factually true that Senator McCain remembers the invention of dirt, I suppose it's up to the voters to decide whether that's relevant, right?

I think both campaigns have done an excellent job of using the media to get their message out, fact-checking each other effectively. Nobody who has been paying any attention would believe that Senator Obama is a Muslim even for a second, but that list of "facts" isn't intended to reach people who have been paying any attention.

You know it and I know it.

I'll say it again: there is plenty to dislike about either candidate based on policies alone. Digging into bizarre accumulations of "facts" intended to present a vivid picture of a candidate as something other than he is doesn't help anybody.

Hi Andy,

Re spell checkers: If you use Firefox as your browser, its spell checker works everywhere you type, including BC's Comment boxes.

Available for free at mozilla dot org.

artical. That won't show as an error in my published comment, but it was a test, and yup, Firefox told me it was a misspelling.

When Obama first appeared on the national scene, I was strongly attracted to him because of his obvious intelligence, his poise, his speaking ability, and his charisma. After reading everything on his web site in search of his positions on the issues, I cooled a little, because he's obviously left of center, and I'm not, except in social issues. I also have concerns about his lack of experience, especially as revealed in some of his comments about international affairs.

I've never voted anything but Republican at presidential level, and I'm still undecided about this race, but I like the shift towards the center that Obama has undertaken recently.

On the other side of the aisle: as a VN vet, I strongly empathize with McCain and the horrors he endured over there; I find him too conservative on social issues, and I worry about his stance on the international issues as well; we don't IMO, have a good candidate in terms of foreign affairs.

It's going to be an interesting election year.

I was trying to follow one of those links listed in commetn #24. I ended up on israelinside.com and read an artiCLE that says no one has seen Barry's birth certificate!

WTF???

This was an issue I wasn't aware of at all. I then did a google search and came up with a bunch of artiCLEs that show a birth cert, but there's no signature or stamp on any of the pics. And from what I've read, officials in Hawaii will not confirm that what is being put out there as Barry's official birth certificate, is in fact an official Hawaii document!

This owuld be one of those things that make you go....hmmmmmm.

Just a thought.

Andy, it just makes me sigh. It's crap.

Senator Obama was born in Hawaii, and Senator McCain was born in Panama. Both are U.S. citizens, and have been since birth. It's that simple.

You say that there is a double standard, and yet your own complaints are about things that meet the standard you defined.

Since it's factually true that Senator McCain remembers the invention of dirt, I suppose it's up to the voters to decide whether that's relevant, right?

You betcha! And they will. And the Democrats (and their allies in the media) will continue to hammer away at these issues. AND YET THERE WON'T BE ALL THE ENDLESS HAND-WRINGING ABOUT THE "UGLINESS" AND "DISGUSTING" NATURE OF IT ALL, like you see when someone brings up some inconvenient facts about Prince Obama. THAT is what I mean about the double-standard.

It's like, okay, the left is gonna smear McCain will all sorts of arguably-true things. But we on the right are supposed to unilaterally disarm, and refuse to fight back with dirt on Obama? And if we do, we're called all sorts of names, and the facts we mention are dismissed as "lies" (even when accompanied with citations)? And this is somehow fair?

Nobody who has been paying any attention would believe that Senator Obama is a Muslim even for a second, but that list of "facts" isn't intended to reach people who have been paying any attention.

Again, you inexplicably put the word "facts" in scare quotes. Why? They are true, are they not? (Correct answer: Yes.)

Did comment #24 say anywhere that Obama is CURRENTLY a Muslim? (Correct answer: No.)

So what is the complaint? That the voters can't be trusted with certain information about a presidential candidate, because they might make the "wrong" decision?

You know it and I know it.

Know what? That some people will be turned off when they learn about Obama's past and close personal associations? Of course. And some people will be turned off when they learn about McCain's little "100 years in Iraq" comment. But that isn't stopping MoveOn.org from funneling millions of dollars into a national television ad campaign on this very issue, now is it? Where's the outrage among the "objective" media over that?

I'll say it again: there is plenty to dislike about either candidate based on policies alone.

This is very true. But since voters often base their decisions on things other than strictly the issues, it's totally fair game to pursue other aspects of the candidate in oppo research. That's how politics has been played in the United States for about 200 years or so. And nothing has changed this year, despite the lofty rhetoric coming from the Obama camp (which your article points out very well, I thought).

Digging into bizarre accumulations of "facts" intended to present a vivid picture of a candidate as something other than he is doesn't help anybody.

Again with the scare quotes. Sigh...

You tell me: What is an "objective" picture of Obama? Who is he, really? Do you know? Does anyone?

Some would suggest he's a truly transformational figure, a political messiah come to permanently change the politics of America for the better. Others think he's an empty suit, a clueless naif. Others think he's a Manchurian Candidate. Others think he's an anti-American, anti-White Bolshevik. Others think he's just another cynical, power-hungry politician. Others think he's just a typical corrupt Chicago-style pol from the Cook County Democrat machine. And others have other opinions of the guy.

Who is right? I think the obvious answer is that no one is right and no one is wrong; it's entirely subjective. There is no "objective" opinion or portrait of Obama (or McCain, or Bush, or anyone for that matter).

So why do you seem to want to disqualify those who make their arguments about him (based on facts) that paint an unflattering portrait? Aren't their opinions just as valid as some mind-numbed 19-year old college undergrad who honestly believes that Obama is the Second Coming? Or someone who believes McCain is an insane war-monger?

Yet all the tut-tutting seems to be reserved for the Obama critics. And worse than merely being dismissed as kooks or wingnuts, they are called "liars" even when their points are factually true. I find that very troubling. As the saying goes, everyone is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts.

RJ: "Yet all the tut-tutting seems to be reserved for the Obama critics." I don't know if you've noticed, but you just posted your comment to an article that most people would identify as criticism of Senator Obama.

Oops!

If you believe that two wrongs somehow cancel each other out, then we simply disagree, and that's all there is to that.

If you believe that ensuring that every knows that Senator Obama's middle name is the same as the former Iraqi dictator's last name is somehow important, then we simply disagree, and that's all there is to that.

Maybe you can show up on my next article criticizing Obama and complain again that nobody gets away with criticizing Obama! :-)

Phillip - I've seen that version on that web site. But I've also seen a few other certificates from Hawaii, that show a signature and a stamp, neither of which is visible on that particular picture, or any other pic of his birth certificate.

I just don't get it...if it is crap, then show a good one! It's like the swiftboat thing...all Kerry had to do was sign the SF-180 and he wouldn't do it. All Obama has to do is produce the real one, with a stamp and he won't! For someone that's supposed to be so intelligent, this seems pretty moronic.

I mean, I don't want to sound partisan here, but are democrats that fucking stupid? Or is it, like I read on one site, just a way to deflect from real issues that could sink him?

Snopes unequivocally states that:

"...no evidence supports a claim that Obama is currently, or ever has been, a Muslim (radical or otherwise)."

(I hate it that Snopes won't allow you to copy-and-paste; one has to transcribe from their site manually. What a PITA.)

When Obama first appeared on the national scene, I was strongly attracted to him because of his obvious intelligence, his poise, his speaking ability, and his charisma.

His much-celebrated speaking ability, poise, and intelligence seem to almost completely disappear when you remove the teleprompter and ask him a difficult question.

After reading everything on his web site in search of his positions on the issues, I cooled a little, because he's obviously left of center, and I'm not, except in social issues.

He's more than left-of-center, at least in terms of his voting record (such as it is). He was judged to be the most far-left Senator in the entire US Senate in 2007, according to the nonpartisan and highly-respected National Journal magazine. That would more him more liberal than Teddy Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, John Kerry, Russ Feingold, and even the admitted-socialist Bernie Sanders.

I also have concerns about his lack of experience, especially as revealed in some of his comments about international affairs.

I think it's fair to say that he is the least-experienced major-party presidential candidate in my lifetime. Wait, make that my parents' lifetime. (I would be happy to run down the list, if anyone would dispute that.)

I've never voted anything but Republican at presidential level, and I'm still undecided about this race, but I like the shift towards the center that Obama has undertaken recently.

So, you are considering rewarding his flip-flopping (a.k.a. dishonesty about what he stands for, what his positions are, what his policies will be, what his core values are, etc.) with your vote? ;-)

Andy, in my job I see birth certificates all the time. Some are filled out with minute detail and more stamps than a philatelists' convention, and... some aren't. It all depends how lazy the registrar was feeling on that particular day.

Besides which, if you look closely you can make out a stamp about two-thirds of the way down. It's very faint, but it's there. Why it's so faint, goodness only knows. Perhaps the clerk couldn't be assed to re-ink his/her stamp.

Andy, I'm a little curious. Let's pretend that's not Senator Obama's birth certificate. (It is, but we'll pretend.) What do you think that would mean, exactly? His father is someone worse? He's not an American? What?

All questions have answers. Most conspiracy theories are long on questions but short on answers. If you don't accept what to most people is the obvious answer, what's your alternative answer?

Andy,

It doesn't matter.

The State Department has issued him a passport, has it not?

He's a citizen; he was born in a US state; but regardless of where he was born, his mother was a citizen at the time of his birth. Although SCOTUS has ruked that those born of an American father and foreign mother must resolve paternity before age 18, they have never put conditions (for obvious reasons) on those born abroad of an American mother.

George Romney was born in Mexico;, as I was; both of us are citizens, eligible to run for the presidency; so is Obama.

White fool...

Obama is a proud black man who for the past twenty years understands his tasks at hand! Once he is in the Whitehouse the teaching of the great Reverend Wright will come to fruition..

BAs the Reverend preached to Obama.."We will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal."

These are the answered prayers for all of us who have been kept down all these generations by the white devil...

Jamal

RJ: "Yet all the tut-tutting seems to be reserved for the Obama critics." I don't know if you've noticed, but you just posted your comment to an article that most people would identify as criticism of Senator Obama.

Oops!

Huh? I think we must be talking past each other. I didn't say your article wasn't critical of Obama. The context that quote of mine was taken from was about critics of Obama's past, personal life, and associations; i.e. people who criticize him for reasons other than "the issues." Whenever someone does so (even in a purely fact-based manner; see comment #24, for example) they are usually pounced upon as being hateful liars who are beneath contempt. But harsh critics of McCain (or Hillary, or Bush...or really anybody but Obama) are given dissimilar treatment.

If you believe that two wrongs somehow cancel each other out, then we simply disagree, and that's all there is to that.

Well, if your opponent is going to sling mud at you, and that mud-slinging is effective (and it almost always is), and you refuse to return some mud of your own, you're very likely going to lose. That's politics. That's why you almost never hear about guys who take "the high road." It's not that they don't exist; it's just that they don't get very far in politics. They're stuck at the city council level somewhere, while a more ruthless candidate is enjoying being called "Congressman."

If you believe that ensuring that every knows that Senator Obama's middle name is the same as the former Iraqi dictator's last name is somehow important, then we simply disagree, and that's all there is to that.

That was about the least relevant (IMO) thing on that list. My position is merely that such factual information should not be censored by media gatekeepers who apparently don't trust the electorate with such "dangerous" facts (and incorrectly label them as "lies"). All's fair in love, war, and politics, and if the Democrats are going to slime McCain, conservatives deserve the opportunity to point out some inconvenient facts about Mr. Obama.

Maybe you can show up on my next article criticizing Obama and complain again that nobody gets away with criticizing Obama! :-)

Again, I think we're just talking past each other, if you honestly think that's what I've been saying.

"His much-celebrated speaking ability, poise, and intelligence seem to almost completely disappear when you remove the teleprompter and ask him a difficult question."

He's still light years ahead of McCain in that regard.

"He's more than left-of-center" An erroneous comment. By definition, everything left of center is "left of center." Duh.

"So, you are considering rewarding his flip-flopping (a.k.a. dishonesty about what he stands for, what his positions are, what his policies will be, what his core values are, etc.) with your vote?"

Yup. Precisely because he's "flip-flopping." I hate politicians who 1) Don't listen to the people, 2) Are unable to admit they are mistaken and change their direction.

We're just completing 8 years of one such "politician."

Doc, Chris,

Have you investigated the possibility that "jamal" could be someone else?

RJ (#83) There's a world of difference between refuting false statements and making false statements of your own.

Feel free to meet every bit of mud slung at Senator McCain with a factual refutation, but slinging mud back just to even the score is... well, I'm just not interested. It's part of the problem.

- Phillip Hussein Winn

Snopes unequivocally states that:

"...no evidence supports a claim that Obama is currently, or ever has been, a Muslim (radical or otherwise)."

Well, then snopes is factually incorrect.

I believe that when you have two of Obama's former teachers from Indonesia stating unequivocally that he was registered in the country as a Muslim is SOME evidence, no?

Also, his friends from Indonesia stating that he prayed to Allah at the local mosque regularly is SOME evidence, correct?

Is snopes infallible or something? Did the guy who wrote the LA Times article just make everything up? Where all the people quoted in the article lying? Or is it possible that Obama is denying it for obvious political purposes, and that a pliant media is happy to oblige?

(The LA Times article was written before Obama became the favorite of the left and the front-runner for the Democrat nomination. I highly doubt the LA Times would publish such an article today.)

But, all of that aside, did comment #24 state anywhere that "Obama is a Muslim" or even that "Obama WAS a Muslim" ??? (Correct answer: No.)

Clav: yes, I see what you mean...

All I can tell you for sure is that each of 'Jamal''s comments has been posted from a different IP address.

I'll keep watching...

Clavos..who are you to gang up on a brother speaking the truth? Is is because I am a black man giving the "scared" white folk my opinion?

Another sad attempt to keep the black man in his place!

Jamal

Actually, "Jamal" is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. He's clearly an anti-White black nationalist Obama supporter. He hasn't made a cogent argument yet. But he's been treated with kid gloves on here.

AMABO and AmericaIsScrewed, on the other hand, made valid, factual points about Obama (backed by sources), and yet were insulted and personally attacked by at least three of the writers here almost immediately.

He's clearly an anti-White black nationalist Obama supporter.

RJ, if 'Jamal' is who I think he is, then he is the exact opposite of what you describe...

RJ, Jamal has been ignored, as he has made no appeal to anything rational. The others have given indication of being based in rationality, and so merited responses.

I think I'm about done with that, though.

- Phillip Hussein Winn

"He's clearly an anti-White black nationalist Obama supporter."

Or (what I think) an impostor; maybe even one named JOM.

"His much-celebrated speaking ability, poise, and intelligence seem to almost completely disappear when you remove the teleprompter and ask him a difficult question."

He's still light years ahead of McCain in that regard.

Then why does McCain want to have ten town hall debates, and Obama is ducking them?

"He's more than left-of-center" An erroneous comment. By definition, everything left of center is "left of center." Duh.

Cute. Let me rephrase: He's more than JUST left-of-center. Left-of-center implies (to me, at least) someone who is a little bit liberal. But judging by his (very limited) voting record, a more accurate description would be "far-left." The National Journal apparently agrees.

"So, you are considering rewarding his flip-flopping (a.k.a. dishonesty about what he stands for, what his positions are, what his policies will be, what his core values are, etc.) with your vote?"

Yup. Precisely because he's "flip-flopping." I hate politicians who 1) Don't listen to the people, 2) Are unable to admit they are mistaken and change their direction.

The problem with this, of course, is that it may not be a matter of "I have seen the light!" (in fact, does anybody seriously believe that's what his recent move to the center is about?); it may simply be a matter of "I'll pretend to be a left-winger in the Democrat primaries and caucuses in order to fool enough people to win the nomination, and then I'll pretend to be a moderate in the general election in order to fool enough people to win in November."

Has anybody heard Obama say "I was wrong. I've changed my mind on this issue. The people have spoken." Or anything similar?

Here is the greatest example of what Obama is going through. Everytime he opens his mouth the media questions him because he is a black man...he cant be smart..must be affirmative action...he cant be a great speaker...must be the teleprompter.

I simply post a black man's opinions and the white boys in here say 'Jamal cant be Jamal, he must be someone else".

Jamal

There's a world of difference between refuting false statements and making false statements of your own.

[shakes head] "There you go again."

What "false statements?" I'm talking about TRUE statements that you continue to label as "lies."

And again, it's Politics 101 - If you spend all your time squashing rumors about yourself while "taking the high road" and refusing to return fire at your opponent, you are very likely to lose. Ask President Dukakis.

Feel free to meet every bit of mud slung at Senator McCain with a factual refutation, but slinging mud back just to even the score is... well, I'm just not interested. It's part of the problem.

Yes, I'm sure butter would never melt in your mouth.

- Phillip Hussein Winn

Unless your middle name really is Hussein, that would be factually inaccurate. However, Barack Obama's middle name really is Hussein, so stating so is true. See the difference? ;-)

Jamal,

Explain why you are posting from multiple computers?

"Well, then snopes is factually incorrect.

I believe that when you have two of Obama's former teachers from Indonesia stating unequivocally that he was registered in the country as a Muslim is SOME evidence, no?

Also, his friends from Indonesia stating that he prayed to Allah at the local mosque regularly is SOME evidence, correct?"

Purely anecdotal evidence, which is notoriously unreliable. Ask any cop who has every taken statements from witnesses at a crime or accident scene.

"Is snopes infallible or something?"

Since the whole point of snopes is to debunk falsehoods, and because it has a reputation for accuracy and truth, I accept its version of issues in dispute, as do millions of others. I have no idea whether it's infallible or not, but I've never heard of them being proven wrong.

I am in a public liberry. And I am not a Computer expert...why are you questioning me and not others posting comments here?

Is it because I am not following your "rules" - I am, is it because you dont agree with me obviously you dont or is it BECAUSE I AM BLACK?

Jamal

RJ,

I submit that you choose to believe in Obama's being Muslim because you want to, as much as anything else.

By believing it and convincing others of its truth, you have what you perceive to be as a powerful weapon against him as a candidate.

Do you think that if the "radical Muslims" wanted to insert a Muslim as POTUS they would be so stupid as to put a black man with some (however tangential) contacts with Islam in his past as their candidate?

Wouldn't it make more sense to put up a white candidate with, say, a Methodist background?

Actually, jamal, you're not black, white, or anything else to us; you're just pixels on a screen.

And just because you're in a liberry doesn't mean you have to jump from computer to computer.

Whats with the people in here? Rather than challege my opinion you attack me on where I am sitting?

Admit it its because of my color and not my opinions...its too obvious

Jamal

Purely anecdotal evidence, which is notoriously unreliable. Ask any cop who has every taken statements from witnesses at a crime or accident scene.

But good enough to be admissible in court!

"Is snopes infallible or something?"

Since the whole point of snopes is to debunk falsehoods, and because it has a reputation for accuracy and truth, I accept its version of issues in dispute, as do millions of others. I have no idea whether it's infallible or not, but I've never heard of them being proven wrong.

I think I just did!

Anecdotal evidence from at least four different people who knew Obama (both teachers and classmates), claiming that he was a) registered as a Muslim in Indonesia, and b) prayed to Allah at the local mosque, is certainly SOME evidence. (Note: "evidence" does not mean "proof.") Yet the claim on snopes is that "no evidence" supports the claim that he was ever a Muslim. "Some evidence" and "no evidence" are mutually exclusive. The LA Times article counts as evidence, to me.

Of course, one could make the argument that merely being "registered" as a Muslim and occasionally praying to Allah at a mosque doesn't make one an official Muslim, especially when this was done as a child.

"Admit it its because of my color and not my opinions...its too obvious

Jamal"

No, jamal. I don't know what your "color" is; I only know what you say it is.

No the same thing.

I submit that you choose to believe in Obama's being Muslim because you want to, as much as anything else.

When