Barack Obama swept the Democratic Party off its feet with his keynote address at the DNC Convention in 2004. His truly inspiring words gave hope and meaning to a party in desperation. His lovable persona and strong work ethic implied that it would be difficult to find a major flaw in the junior senator. However, just when many of us, on the left, thought Obama was un-smearable, Senator John McCain unleashes a mudslinging campaign against him. Here is the letter McCain sent Obama:
"When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership's preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter. ... I'm embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interept your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in political to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble. Again, sorry for the confusion, but please be assured I won't make the same mistake again."
I'm not particularly interested in McCain's whimpering. Rather, I dare to speculate on what I think is manifesting: Dent Obama's image now for later reference.
It's true. I think McCain, a possible GOP presidential nominee for 2008, is attempting to lay a foundation to later smear Obama, just in case he's on the ticket for 2008 (which I doubt). I'm aware that this may sound all too suspicious, but why else would McCain engage in such a public display of character-thrashing? One thing is for sure, the wingnuts over at Redstate are ecstatic over this. They see it as a victory for the GOP since the Democrat's rising star was bitch-slapped! A bitch-slapping it isn't. Obama hasn't responded to this just yet. When he does, expect the same eloquence and honest character he has employed since he broke-out in 2004.
McCain, I believe you have fucked up going after Obama. It is not because I happen to like Obama, or because I worked on his senatorial campaign, but because this will make you look like the fool that you are.
Then again, the GOP's talking points have been lame as of late. What do they do after Coretta Scott King's funeral? Bitch the fuck about it! They make it seem as though the funeral was actually a political rally. They claim that it was inappropriate to bring politics into the funeral ceremony because it is "bad etiquette". Huh...just like politics were brought into a family's personal decision regarding a woman in a persistent vegetative state. Of course politics were appropriate, in my opinion, because Dr. King's legacy is defined by his civil rights work and the politics that came from it. Perhaps Bush's spy program shouldn't have been mentioned, but continuing to yap about makes the funeral a partisan issue...thanks GOP!
9 comments:
It was still very distasteful to do that at a woman's FUNERAL for crying out loud! Funerals are for paying respects to the dead and condolences to their survivors, not ripping on the President...which can be done anywhere!
It was VERY poor tatse.
I would usually agree with you Echo, but this is a woman who spent most of her life in the political/social realm. I think Mrs. King would have greatly appreciated this. A fitting tribute to a wonderful human being.
BigNewsDay, I absolutely agree. Politics and other social causes were inherent in Mrs. King's life. Therefore, I think the content of the funeral was appropriate. Conservatives are now trying to tell us how funerals are ought to be held. Funny how the King family hasn't said anything bad about former President Carter's comments. The dude was right on: Dr. King was wire-tapped by the FBI at some time during his civil rights work. Like usual, wingnuts are making a huge deal out of something that isn't. If King George W. Bush would have had his feet kissed by the people in attendance, perhaps the citizens of wingnuttia would be happy.
Well stated Lefty!
MLK was wiretapped during who's administration?? KENNEDY.
It was still disrespectful, no matter how the Left tries to play it off as somehow appropriate. Once again the Dems are belittling something that should be a huge deal. You just don't get it because you have no respect for life.
I'm sorry my dear Echo, but I have to disagree with you here. Illegal wiretaps are wrong no matter which party the president belongs to.
You say that the Democrats are trying to spin this issue? I believe it is the wingnuts that are making a mountain out of a mole hill.
By the way, I respect life a great deal more than most Republicans. Remember, I'm against this illegal war that King George started in the desert to make money for his friends at the expense of thousands of lives.
Oh ok I see. I didn't mean to offend your sensibilities, oh Righteous one. The respecting life comment was aimed at metalhead, but since you took it personally...
You pick and choose what life you respect and don't. What about all those people that died during Saddam's reign? The mass graves? Aren't they worth anything? Weren't their lives worth anything or is genocide ok with you unless its your people? Are you going to tell me it never happened? Saddam didn't use WMDs on his own people? Doesn't everybody deserve freedom? Or just the white folks?
I bet you are also pro abortion, pro euthanasia, pro assisted suicide but anti death penalty, right?
The point about wire tapping was that it was done under a DEMOCRAT. Not whether its was right or wrong. You missed the point entirely. I personally would feel pretty OK with the Government trying to intercept alleged terrorists phone calls. And since I am not a terrorist, why would I care? Domesting spying has a long history in this country. If you research you'll find that Lincoln, Cleveland, FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and of course Clinton ALL used it. The FISA court was the invention of Carter and a far left wing congress, and up until now, no one (including Clinton) has respected it because its clearly unconstitutional!
Make up your minds on whether to blame Bush or not predicting 9-11, or bash him for trying to do something preventative. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't!! And you all like it that way.
You didn't offend me darlin', but I respectfully disagree with your opinion. There are right ways and wrong ways to solve the worlds probles. I personally think Bush has consistantly chosen the wrong ways. I'll never say that Saddam was a good guy, but for Bush to start a war without any type of exit strategy is absurd.
You said: "I bet you are also pro abortion, pro euthanasia, pro assisted suicide but anti death penalty, right?"
Well, I guess you can say that I'm pro choice, but I personally feel abortion is the wrong choice. I believe people do have the right to die, and I'm for the death penalty. I'm not sure what kind of a Liberal that makes me, but at least I have a mind of my own. I don't need "party lines" to make my decisions for me.
Lastly, regarding wiretaps. I know you were saying that Kennedy was a Democrat. That is why I said "Illegal wiretaps are wrong no matter which party the president belongs to".
My mother always taught me that two wrongs don't make a right. I don't think that ten, twenty, thirty, wrongs would make a right either.
Love & kisses,
BND
I'd add that not only was King wiretapped under Kennedy's administration, but there's a substantial pile of evidence to support that the government arranged to have him assasinated. It's interesting reading anyways, and it's legit enough to be on Wikipedia.
Highlights are:
-The "killer" (James Earl Ray) would have had to make an incredible shot, which his Army record proves would have been a miracle (he failed many times to qualify as a rifleman based on his very poor marksmanship).
-The killer was basically a dumbass. All his other crimes were marked by incompetance, and he almost always got caught immediately for the various thefts and burgularies that he attempted. To think he could have pulled off the assasination of a national figurehead is unlikely.
-Witnesses described the shots as coming from an unidentified vehicle nearby, not the position that the government claims the Mr. Ray was in. Later ballistic evidence supports this theory.
There's all kinds of reasons the government would have had Dr. King assasinated, and I don't think any of it has to do with his civil rights stance. The problem is that he was a socialist, and preached socialism without making any effort to make a distinction with communism, which was the paranioa of the day in 1960's. Dr. King had a gigantic following, and rightfully so, but commanding a following that large subscribing to communist ideals might have been too much of a threat for the FBI to ignore with (or whatever government agency thinks they can play God). The idea that the government killed Dr. King almost sounds blasphemous to mention, but I find it interesting due to the historical context.
I don't necessarily buy this government conspiracy theory, but I don't really buy that a single dumbass farm boy killed him either. It'll probably go unresolved for the rest of time, like the Kennedy assasination. Bombshells like that would be too much for the government to come clean on, at least for many generations.
Post a Comment