McBama: The Long-Awaited Unveiling of The Official Establishment Tool

User Forum Topic
Submitted by partypup on July 16, 2008 - 11:58pm

Okay, if these weren't such dire and desperate times, Obama's recent posturing would be downright comical. He is literally flipping positions more often and with more ease than a FL condo speculator circa 2004.

Is anyone else paying attention to the egregious number of U-turns he has done only TWO MONTHS after cinching the nomination? Whenever I see his smug mug on TV now, chin tilted up like a faux Roman emperor, I just imagine him saying: "You're stuck with me now. What're you going to do? Vote for McCain? F*** off."

A list of McBama's most flagrant Flips (in the past 3 weeks):

1. After vowing to eschew private fundraising and take public financing, he has now refused public money.
2. Once he threatened to filibuster a bill to protect telephone companies from liability for their cooperation with national security wiretaps; now he has voted for the legislation.
3. Turning his back on a lifetime of support for gun control, he now recognizes a Second Amendment right to bear arms in the wake of the Supreme Court decision.
4. Formerly, he told the Israeli lobby that he favored an undivided Jerusalem. Now he says he didn’t mean it.
5. From a 100 percent pro-choice position, he now has migrated to expressing doubts about allowing partial-birth abortions.
6. For the first time, he now speaks highly of using church-based institutions to deliver public services to the poor.
7. Having based his entire campaign on withdrawal from Iraq, he now pledges to consult with the military first.
8. During the primary, he backed merit pay for teachers — but before the union a few weeks ago, he opposed it.
9. After specifically saying in the primaries that he disagreed with Sen. Hillary Clinton’s proposal to impose Social Security taxes on income over $200,000 and wanted to tax all income, he has now adopted the Clinton position.

And watch for this, boys and girls: When gas hits $6/gallon, McBama will flip *surprise!* and support off-shore drilling. Voters wanted "change", right? And he plans to give it to them on a REGULAR basis -- by "changing" his mind every few days.

And as if that's not enough, I wake up this morning and hear that McBama now wants to take the "war on terrorism" to Pakistan??

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...

Hello? As if our foreign policy isn't jacked up enough? Let's see...we have a lameduck president who is threatening a country that MAY have a nuke; but now this bonehead wants to go after a country that DEFINITELY has nukes.

This is "change"??

And no, I don't buy the lame arguments about "shrewdly playing to the middle". His isn't playing to the middle, the right, or any side. He is playing to sheer insanity -- appealing only to the NeoCons who still run this joint and the 5,000 or so crackpots in red states who actually think it's "fun" to go to war. Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and possibly Iran -- for crying out loud, not even hardcore Republicans are looking for a 4-front war!! There is no consensus to be had here. This is not a move that BROADENS political appeal -- just like retroactive immunity to telecoms for warrantless wiretapping doesn't play to any voter bloc: "You know, I was on the fence about Obama, but now that I know he'll sell our civil liberties down the river to protect the major phone companies in the war on terror, he's got my vote!!"

We need to face facts: McBama is now officially a part of the military industrial complex.

"No, I most certainly would NOT have attacked Iraq after 9/11! ...But yes, (a) I will continue to give Bush as much money as he needs to continue that pointless war; (b) I will take military action against Iran, if necessary, to make sure they don't threaten Israel; and (c) I will take the fight to Pakistan to search for terrorists -- who, incidentally, all have mailing addresses in Iraq."

Even the dim-witted Dems who support him -- Richardson, Edwards, Biden -- all think this is ludicrous.

And word on the Beltway is that McBama's arrogance is even starting to piss off those in his own party.

"Privately, however, there is a different message coming from some Democratic quarters on the Hill and on K Street. Some Democratic leadership staffers complain that, having defeated the vaunted Clinton political machine in the primaries, the Obama campaign now feels a “sense of entitlement” that leads to “arrogance.”

One Democratic aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity, compared the Obama campaign unfavorably to President Bush’s administration. *GASP! SURPRISE!*

“At least Bush waited until he was in the White House before they started ignoring everybody,” the aide said."

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?u...

If I were a McBama supporter, I'd get a refund on my donation(s).

Black people foolishly think his nomination and election will be a proud day for our race. Well, it won't be the first time the we were taken in and fooled by one of our own, simply because of their skin color.

Can you say "O.J."?

Alas...Jesse Jackson was right. This man is not to be trusted. And he will take us straight to hell, with a flash of his pearly white teeth and a folksy grin.

Hope you enjoy the ride!

Submitted by NotCranky on July 17, 2008 - 12:07am.

Are you sure your name isn't "partypooper" instead of "partypup"?

Submitted by marion on July 17, 2008 - 1:12am.

I don't believe our friend partypup is really black. I never did. I don't think he went to Harvard with Obama, I don't think he's the CEO of a big, prestigious company. He seems like a fake to me. A big fake, playing both ends against the middle.

Submitted by Arraya on July 17, 2008 - 2:46am.

..when yielding pitchfork, keep pointy end away from your eyes and the eyes of your colleagues in your mob. Great attention must be paid to the torch. Avoiding dousing it with water and keep it above head level for safety reasons.

Now, when storming the bastions of power it is important to keep team spirit. Having a mob chant is useful. Keep it short and to the point."

Submitted by NYCLurker on July 17, 2008 - 6:33am.

I was an early Obama supporter, giving money waaay back when there were like a dozen contenders for the Democratic nomination.

The other night his campaign called me and asked if I'd like to make another contribution, and my answer was "NO WAY!!" "Why not?" he asked.

My answer:

"When he stopped recognizing the separation between church and state, and started supporting the government's right to warrantless eavesdropping on Americans, he lost my support"

The campaign guy's response: "Well, yes, a lot of contributors have been saying the same thing"....pause..."But would you rather have John McCain in the Whitehouse?"

At which point I hung up.

Submitted by Coronita on July 17, 2008 - 7:02am.

I figured obama was going to be flippy floppy. To this day, i still don't know where he stands, except he wants to tax higher wage earners more...I'm still waiting to hear how he plans on spending that $.

Got Ralph Nader?

Submitted by rnen on July 17, 2008 - 7:04am.

marion wrote:
I don't believe our friend partypup is really black. I never did. I don't think he went to Harvard with Obama, I don't think he's the CEO of a big, prestigious company. He seems like a fake to me. A big fake, playing both ends against the middle.

What the hell difference does it make if he is black, white or freaking purple???

If some one dares challenge Obama they can not possibly be black? Are you serious?

Tell me Marion, is voting for someone because he is black any better than not voting for him for the same reason??

Who is the racist here?

Submitted by tomoeDave on July 17, 2008 - 7:37am.

If you think you're seeing the real Obama now, remember that he's probably doing what it takes to get elected more than he is reneging on his promises. Expect another change to occur once he gets into office. The polls say he leads, but not by a large enough margin that he shouldn't bother fighting.

These issues you list are the ones that he probably would get some real fight on from McCain. Note how many of them aren't real votes, but just expressing openness to a different point of view. And some of them feel like you have to read between the lines. For example...he stands behind the Supreme Court ruling...you hear, "I support crazy gun-totin' freaks!" but I hear "and maybe a few other decisions should be upheld, like habeas corpus." You must learn to think of this in terms of how the other side will be forced into a corner, particularly on issues they've abused.

Submitted by FormerSanDiegan on July 17, 2008 - 8:29am.

I'm not really an Obama supporter. I like most of these changes. These seem like rational, real-world, pragmatic positions, rather than the rhetorical idealistic positions held previously.

One example: Iraq - Do you want him to say that regardless of the conditions on the ground he should order an immediate withdrawal, based on the fact that 10-12 months ago he thought that was the proper course of action. Just to save face ? To me, adapting to what has changed in Iraq and the willingness to reconsider his position is a HUGE improvement over GWB, who usually takes a position and never lets go, regardless.

These changes demonstrate adaptibility and maturity. He's starting to me to look more electable and presidential, rather than an idealogue.

Submitted by partypup on July 17, 2008 - 8:59am.

Marion, I don't know what proof you would require of my race or my education (and for the record, I never said I was a CEO; I am a senior vice president), nor do I feel compelled to provide any. I wouldn't say the company that I work for is all that "prestigious", unless you love watching television.

you obviously and mistakenly think that all African American people are monolithic in their thought processes. If you take Obama to task, you can't possible be black. What kind of juvenile thinking is that? 2/3 of my extended family supports Obama, but 1/3 does not. And incidentally, the ones who support Obama also happen to be some of the dimmest bulbs in the bunch who also blindly proclaimed OJ's innocence in the face of common sense and evidence.

All blacks must support Obama? How ironic coming from a woman who seethes when other make assumptions about the color of an African American's skin. Just as you and I recognize that being African American doesn't mean necessarily having dark skin, you should also recognize that being African American doesn't mean that one should blindly follow Obama off a cliff and refuse to hold him accountable for his lack of core values and alarming propensity to change his positions.

And for the record, it's offensive for you to challenge my race or education when you have no proof whatsoever to the contrary. I spent more than 17 HOURS along with 84 other editors of Harvard Law Review in a marathon election process in 1990 trying to get Obama elected as the first African American president of that publication.

I am a "fake" playing both ends against the middle? Please, I am only playing one end: I'm looking for truth whereas you and so many others seemed resigned to look the other way.

And here's another blow to your long list of presumptions: I am a woman.

Lastly, it is curious that you have no response to the actual assertions in my post. No problem with his pre-fascist FISA vote? No problem with his Bush-esque blurring of church and state? No problem with threats against Pakistan.

What will it take for you to wake up and realize that Obama is simply the "velvet glove" that the Establishment is using to accomplish what they would have trouble accomplishing under McCain? And it's working. Because people like yourself are OVERLOOKING troublesome signs that you would readily identify in any other candidate, simply because he is Obama.

I swear, Marion. You would probably vote for George Bush -- if he were black, charming and in his mid-40s.

Submitted by partypup on July 17, 2008 - 9:24am.

"I'm not really an Obama supporter. I like most of these changes. These seem like rational, real-world, pragmatic positions, rather than the rhetorical idealistic positions held previously.
One example: Iraq - Do you want him to say that regardless of the conditions on the ground he should order an immediate withdrawal, based on the fact that 10-12 months ago he thought that was the proper course of action. Just to save face ? To me, adapting to what has changed in Iraq and the willingness to reconsider his position is a HUGE improvement over GWB, who usually takes a position and never lets go, regardless.
These changes demonstrate adaptibility and maturity. He's starting to me to look more electable and presidential, rather than an idealogue."

I never said a candidate shouldn't be permitted to change his mind and re-assess issues as new facts come to light. Only a fool (Bush comes to mind) will stick to a position even as it turns out to be clearly wrong. And I don't mind some of the flips, either. Take gun control. I actually have guns, myself, so I obviously welcome his new position on this issue.

But my problem with Obama is these flips came so soon after he cinched the nomination. What new facts have come to light on the ground in Iraq that would necessitate his belief that our troops may stay longer than 16 months? If anything, it *appears* that the Surge is working and Iraq is on the road to being able to police itself. Do I believe this? Nope. But that's what the media is spinning. The reports of Iraqi violence are down considerably in the past 6 months. So I ask myself: why flip now? Why not flip when a new and frightening wave of violence sweeps the country? And the answer is because Obama is flipping at the behest of others: the Establishment.

My problem with Obama is that he has flipped an EXTRAORDINARY number of times. Seriously, nine flips in 2 months? Why even bother to take a position? I thought we were electing a president, not a mood ring. Maybe he needs to more seriously investigate the facts before taking a position. In any event, I have never seen a candidate flip this much, so fast. It's astounding.

My biggest problem with Obama is the NATURE of his flips. He has flipped on critical issues that are now life and death, in my opinion. I disagree that these flips reflect "rational, real-world, pragmatic" positions. How is it rational to permit warrantless wiretapping? In what universe is it now acceptable to subvert my civil liberties? This is only rational to a person who has no concept of the importance of the Fourth Amendment or the horrible ramifications of its violation. I strongly urge you not to brush this off. You obviously have no clue where this slippery slope could lead. Here's a hint: a fascist republic.

And Obama did NOT have to vote this way. He had promised to filibuster, and he folded like a patio chair. Can you imagine any member of the electorate, in a red OR blue state, deciding to vote against Obama because he choose to protect their civil liberties?? It's ridiculous to think that this move reflects anything other than a favor to the Establishment.

Ditto for his threats against Pakistan. How in the world is this beneficial? Who can possibly think that we have either the (a) global standing to enter another country without permission or (b) the resources to do so? It's simply inflammatory and dangerous, and I am quite surprised that Obama supporters have consumed so much Kool Aid that they can't see how this man is now exhibiting signs that we all easily identified in Bush. Obama was supposed to be the candidate of "change". What "change" does this foreign policy represent?? All voters, both GOP and Dem, are sick and tired of war. All we want now are peace and jobs. Period.

If you think that a candidate has to shred the Constitution and continue this country's imperialist foreign policy in order to be "electable", then you must have been very pleased with the 8 years that George Bush has given us.

Submitted by dumbrenter on July 17, 2008 - 9:42am.

When a politician moves with the times and decides to change his ways/thoughts, and acts according to constraints set by forces outside his control, you accuse him of being a flip-flopper.

When a politician stands to his position and defends it come what may, you accuse him of being an idealist, out of touch, hard-headed or Bush (depending on your party affiliation).

What will ever satisfy you people? You would have went after some of the greatest men who ever lived: Were you living in Jefferson's time, he would have been the flip-flopper for Louisiana purchase. You would have accused Lincoln for being a flip-flopper OR an idealist depending on which period of his time you decided to judge him.
Same goes for Franklin, Madison, FDR and many others.

Both Obama and McCain have demonstrated that they are street-smart and have enough common sense to solicit support from constituencies that are generally known to oppose them.

Submitted by rnen on July 17, 2008 - 9:56am.

Well said Partypup.

I think more than a few of us have grown tired of Marion's "I'm a black woman victim therefore I am the spokes person for all blacks" attitude.

Am I the only one who is tired of reading Marion's self-rightious post's?

Get over yourself Marion.

Submitted by Casca on July 17, 2008 - 10:02am.

I don't see BO as a flipper. I don't think that he had any bond with his original positions either. He is simply changing his positions to suck in boobs who think his words have meaning. There is no bottom with this fellow, he is by training, and by upbringing, a blank slate with no attachment to any idea or nation, and thus unfit for any office.

When compared to a man with decades in the Senate and House, who never took an earmark, what's to compare?

Submitted by cr on July 17, 2008 - 10:22am.

People only want Obama because he's different (new, fresh, young, not WASP), without really thinking through if different in this case is better.

That's like saying I'm tired of paying high gas prices and trading your car for whatever is available at the local pawn shop. Next thing you know you're riding an ass to work.

(reference to Democratic party mascot intended)

Wanting change for the sake of change is short-sighted.

Submitted by Bugs on July 17, 2008 - 10:52am.

I'm a California voter. That means that for me, this presidential election is basically over. When I cast my ballot in the primaries, that was the extent of my participation in choosing who will be president. Whatever decisions I could possibly make after that will have no bearing on the outcome of this election. The same goes for each other California voter.

In a presidential election, California is an overwhelmingly Blue state. Our electoral votes will go with the DNC no matter what. The FBI could arrest Obama for high treason with a dozen 12-year old Al-Quaida boys on live TV during the NBC Nightly News, complete with the videotapes to prove it, and California would still vote for the DNC candidate. God could come down and tell everyone that McCain was the saint and Obama was the sinner and California would still vote for the DNC candidate. This was all was written in stone long before the dawn of this century and I doubt it will change in my lifetime.

All that remains is for most of the voters to make the mark they were going to make anyway regardless of which candidates won their respective nominations. There are no converts to be made, and even if there were it wouldn't touch the results of the coming election.

Seeing as how there are no hearts and minds to win over, the next best thing is to watch the campaigning for it's entertainment value. A little rational discourse would fit that bill if it were possible, but the partisans are here to make sure that never happens.

Politics (and Marion's gender hostility, dating problems, spousal support hassles and all her other triggers) ruined Piggington's.

Submitted by Allan from Fallbrook on July 17, 2008 - 11:04am.

Partypup: I second that. Excellent set of posts and exactly along the lines of what I said on the other OT thread: Use reasoning and logic to make your point, and get rid of this ad hominem nonsense.

Slavish adherence to any sort of ethnicity, creed, religion or school of thought creates that same purblindness that allowed Hitler's rise to power, the Soviet Union and the fascist brand of Islam that Osama is ramming down the throats of his co-religionists.

Again, well said.

Submitted by marion on July 17, 2008 - 11:47am.

Buggs, if you don't like my off-topic posts, how about if you just don't read them? Is that particularly difficult for you?

Wow! I've ruined this whole site. I didn't know I had that much power.

Submitted by marion on July 17, 2008 - 12:07pm.

Allan from Fallbrook wrote:
Slavish adherence to any sort of ethnicity, creed, religion or school of thought creates that same purblindness that allowed Hitler's rise to power, the Soviet Union and the fascist brand of Islam that Osama is ramming down the throats of his co-religionists.

Again, well said.

Allan, I've read partypup's tirade: Obama is flip-flopping around on issues, so on and so forth.

We have to choose between the candidates we are given, is that not correct?

You said you're not voting for McCain, then who are you voting for? Partypup is welcome to vote for McCain and the misery will continue. I have seen nothing but negativity, complaints, tirades from this poster who CLAIMS to be black. However, I'm willing to bet, She, He, or it isn't black.

Also, I was under the impression that partypup was a man. Hmmm. This may be way out of line, but if this is a woman, she's sexually frustrated as hell!

Submitted by cooperthedog on July 17, 2008 - 1:21pm.

System: Coke or Pepsi?
Voter: But I want a Sprite...
System: Tough sh!t.

Ahh, the (de)merits of a two-party system.

Submitted by an on July 17, 2008 - 1:22pm.

cooperthedog wrote:
System: Coke or Pepsi?
Voter: But I want a Sprite...
System: Tough sh!t.

Ahh, the (de)merits of a two-party system.


+1

Submitted by PCinSD on July 17, 2008 - 1:42pm.

[quote=marion
You said you're not voting for McCain, then who are you voting for? Partypup is welcome to vote for McCain and the misery will continue. I have seen nothing but negativity, complaints, tirades from this poster who CLAIMS to be black. However, I'm willing to bet, She, He, or it isn't black.

Also, I was under the impression that partypup was a man. Hmmm. This may be way out of line, but if this is a woman, she's sexually frustrated as hell![/quote]

Simply amazing. This coming from her royal highness, the nattering nitwit of negativism. One word describes Marion: Toxic.

Submitted by marion on July 17, 2008 - 1:47pm.

Oh, yes, Pablo. You and your house full of cats. If you posted a pic on here, I'll wager that would be enough to understand everything about you.

Submitted by Casca on July 17, 2008 - 1:55pm.

marion wrote:
she's sexually frustrated as hell!

Finally, a subject you know something about.

Submitted by nostradamus on July 17, 2008 - 2:06pm.

OMG what is going on over here?

Sadly I agree with the post that Obama is simply doing at it takes to get elected. Blame the voters for this. He HAS to appeal to the most voters and probably has a team of people telling him on a daily basis what stance to take.

Submitted by jficquette on July 17, 2008 - 2:09pm.

Great post Partypup. I have never understood why Blacks support Democrats anyway since its obvious all they care about is getting elected and keeping Blacks "down" while blaming Republicans for the problems.

Don't Blacks understand that it was the Democrats who started the KKK and who were the ones that opposed the civil rights act?? Don't they understand that the Republican party was founded by those opposed to Slavery??

Most don't know that MLK's father was a registered Republican and MLK was probably one too although no record exists as to his registration.

Also what about them having Klansman Bryd in the Senate for all these years. Imagine if a Republican was in the KKK.

Thanks again.

John

Submitted by PCinSD on July 17, 2008 - 2:15pm.

marion wrote:
Oh, yes, Pablo. You and your house full of cats. If you posted a pic on here, I'll wager that would be enough to understand everything about you.

What exactly does my physical appearance have to do with this? Should we base your comments on your looks? If you're that shallow, then you should post your full photo on this site. Then we'll be able to "understand everything about you". Makes sense to me.

Submitted by marion on July 17, 2008 - 2:30pm.

Pablo, my mistake for not being clearer. It's your whole persona. The pic would just tie everything together, dude.

And Casca, yeah. You really nailed it. Gosh, you're brilliant.

Submitted by rnen on July 17, 2008 - 2:32pm.

There is no talking reason with anyone who is blinded by hate and makes decisions based on emotions not reason or fact. You can tell who these people are by their lashing out with personal attacks rather than responding to a comment with a reasoned arguement.

This apply to anyone here?

Submitted by marion on July 17, 2008 - 3:03pm.

pabloesqobar wrote:
Simply amazing. This coming from her royal highness, the nattering nitwit of negativism. One word describes Marion: Toxic.

Pabloesqobar, there is a reason why you are so bitter. You owe it to yourself to explore that with a professional.

Submitted by partypup on July 17, 2008 - 3:55pm.

"You said you're not voting for McCain, then who are you voting for? Partypup is welcome to vote for McCain and the misery will continue. I have seen nothing but negativity, complaints, tirades from this poster who CLAIMS to be black. However, I'm willing to bet, She, He, or it isn't black.

Also, I was under the impression that partypup was a man. Hmmm. This may be way out of line, but if this is a woman, she's sexually frustrated as hell!"

I'm speechless. You are so obsessed with race and sex it's nothing short of pathetic. When logic fails you (which seems to happen on a regular basis), you resort to name-calling and ad hominems. What in God's name do my thoughts about Obama have to do with my level of sexual satisfaction as a woman??? And are you implying that a man could make these SAME observations without being sexually frustrated? You need professional help, Marion. And for the record, most of what you say is out of line. I'd be willing to take an informal poll of posters on this board to prove that point.

Negativity, complaints, tirades from me? In case you hadn't noticed, the world is changing around us with mind-blowing speed. We are experiencing grave climate changes, global famine and the collapse of the postWar financial system -- and yet, I am supposed to remain peppy and inspiring -- like Obama. Is that about right? It might interest you to know that two highly-placed friends of mine at banks have quietly acknowledged that the industry is expecting MASSIVE runs on savings and loans in the next 60-90 days. Teh FDIC simply won't be able to handle all of the losses. It's all coming apart, Marion. Sorry to bum you out.

Youcan continue to delude yourself about Obama or the plethora of other challenges facing all denizens of planet earth right now, but I choose to face reality head-on and not be distracted by discussions of skin color and hair texture, the shade of my legs, sexual frustration or any of the other miscellaneous and irrelevant topics you bring to this board.

And you are willing to bet that I'm not black? YOU'RE ON. But seriously, how many times are you going to harp on this issue? You are so obssessed with race and color it's frightening. If I had agreed with you and supported Obama, then you would never have questioned my race. But since I disagreed with you and the Official Black Position, my race is suddenly in question. Do you have any idea how embarrassing you sound? And you wonder why we have a problem with race relations in this country?? Look in the mirror; you are part of the problem.

As ridiculous as your challenge is, I am willing to take it on -- and gladly make you eat your words. Name the proof you desire, and you shall have it. Maybe I can scan a copy of my Black Citizens Card and email it to you? Shall I list black hair care products that I use? You tell me. I so look forward to seeing you type the words, "I was wrong".

And it amazes me that you have no comment on the underlying issues that Obama is flipping on. You casually toss aside his incursion to our civil liberties or threats to a nuclear-armed country. It's MUCH more important to focus on my sexual frustration!

And for the record, I'm not voting for McCain. I'm voting third party. And if you think for one moment that Obama is going to end the "misery", you are in for one helluva rude awakening. Good luck surviving the next 8 years, Marion. I have a feeling you're going to be roadkill.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.