His name may be "Jeremiah", but he's no Old Testament prophet. He is a plain
old race baiting bigot with a big cash flow from his Faithful, and a
highly visible parishioner in his pew the last 20 years who appears to have
Oh yawn. The Poor Downtrodden Victim Society rears it tired head. Wright
was not reciting 2 century old history. He was accusing the nation - at this
time - of being just as bad. He is a malignancy on the culture, a bigot to
his bones, and a caricature of a pastor. He has many fellow travelers,
notably the "Reverends" Jackson and Sharpton. All three of these
guys are Victim pimps, no more.
You either don't live here in the area or are utterly disconnected from
reality. Wright *is* rich, thanks to his flock giving large sums of
money to him. So is Obama. These guys have less in common with urban
poor blacks than I do - and I'm as white as a ghost. They do what the
far left liberals always do to the poor: condescend to them. I know
this because - unlike Hussein Obama - I've *been* poor. Obama is a
political carpetbagger and Wright is a fraud.
Tim Daneliuk email@example.com
So you're saying that the only ones who can legitimately work for the rights of
the poor are people who are poor themselves? That *is* disconnected from
I would like to see you back up all your name-calling with a list of verifiable
actions that Obama has taken, either during his years as a community organizer,
or in the IL legislature, or in the US Senate, that justify the names you sling.
No, I'm saying that rich liberals like Obama keep the their pet poor around
to appear to be benificient but they are no such thing. Obama's activism
isn't rooted in attracting business into poor neighboorhoods, he's already
demonstrated an antipathy towards business in his comments about oil companies.
His activism is built on the premise that the poor are victims, that
their condition is not their fault, and that everyone else owes them
something. The truth is that without a permanent working poor underclass
and below, the liberal Democrats would have no compelling voting base,
or at least not enough of one to get elected to anything above
dog catcher. They *need* to keep the poor in their place, or replace
them with new imported poverty to keep a permanent begging class in
place to vote for them. It sounds harsh, but work with almost
anyone who has *worked* their way up from poverty and you will
generally find a fairly low level of respect for the Obamas of this
Furthermore, "the rights of the poor" he "works" for are nothing more
than a socialist wealth redistribution system. The "rights" he claims
for them exist in no founding document of the US, nor are they even
natural rights. He is however, strangely silent about the *sins* of
For example, you NEVER hear him (or Jackson or Sharpton) calling their own
communities to "repentance" - to stop behaving in the violent, disgusting,
and abusive manner that causes most of the poverty they experience. Instead
Obama questions the incarceration rates of blacks vs. everyone else with
the not too veiled message that it's really racist at the core.
(He should read this: http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-04-02hm.html )
But this is no surprise ... he went to a racist church, which at the time
was run by a Race Victimhood Pimp masquerading as a minister of God. Not
much different than the Iranian Ayatollahs now that I think about it.
We don't have to go that far back. Let's just stick to his most
Let's begin with lies, exaggerations, and taking all sides of issues:
Then there's his basic lack factual knowledge:
McCain gets abused for not remembering the differences between Sunni and Shia
halfway around the word. Obama doesn't know what his own country looks
like ... and he's about 30 years *younger* than McCain. That has to be
more than just "I was tired." (I bet Obama can recite the 7 Pillars Of
Islam from memory though, but thats a guess on my part.)
Then there is the considerable body of evidence connecting him, at least
with political crooks and outright thugs. Google the following three names
together: rezko obama blagojevich The latter is the malodorous governor of
our state and is #1 on the FBI investigation hit parade at the moment.
The corruption in this state runs deep AND wide. It sure looks like - though
not yet proven - that Obama was part of it. There is enough incidental
evidence that he has an ethics problem that I do not think he merits
being elected or even considered for the highest office of the land.
But ... he's a far left Democrat and - as we've seen repeatedly - they
are above the law far more so than anything Bush and his bunch could invent.
Then there's the matter of attending a church - for 20 or so years - where
the pastor is virulent racist but Obama never hear a word.
I have no idea what kind of a person Obama is personally. He may well
be a fine husband and father. But he is an atrocious political
candidate who actually makes Hillary look good (which I thought to
be impossible). He has major league warts, no record of positive
accomplishment (other than feeding at the public trough to get the
rest of us to pick of the tab for the highly dysfunctional inner
city community he claims to be "helping"), and only distanced himself
from the bigoted snakeoil of Wright when he had absolutely no other choice.
The Dems could do better. They could do WAY better - Lieberman leaps
to mind. Even our friend Gore-bie would be better - and he'd probably
beat anyone in this field in a walk. But because the nutcase Left has
hijacked the Dems far more effectively than the Right has been
hijacked by its religious base, the Dems keep going to the bottom of
the barrel for their candidates. I cannot abide McCain's political
positions for the most part, but I hope he just clobbers Obama in the
Nov. general election - it is exactly the reality check the Dems
Tim Daneliuk firstname.lastname@example.org
You go Tim! There is a reason that it's called "Crook" County!
I've said it all along BO is a Chicago politician. So by DEFINITION,
there is stink on him somewhere. It may take a while to find, but let
there be no doubt, it is there!
On Tue, 13 May 2008 19:25:18 -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
And I used to live in Chicago. The fact that Illinois, and especially
Chicago, politicians are crooked surprises you? And by extrapolation and
experience, everywhere else as well :-).
The trick is to vote for the crook who will do the least harm for the
country and the most good for you.
Me, I prefer someone who knows a Shiite from a Sunni. McCain is beginning
to remind me of a Bush/Stockdale hybrid.
Perhaps. but if so, delayed.
Sometime ago CNN played a recording of Stockdale, taped
several years before he hooked up with Perot, in which he
described being shot down and his first several months as
a POW. He sounded pretty normal at that time.
In addition to his injuries from ejection, the civilians who
captured him beat him badly until the militia called
them off. One knee was injured so badly he was
afraid he would lose the leg. He said that it had
been the experience of the French that the Communists
did not repatriate amputees (since then I've often
wondered why) so that if he lost the leg he was
as good as dead. Being one of the very first
Americans captured by the North Vietnamese hr
was treated as a sort of novelty and his leg was
saved by a series of operations, he thought surgeons
who worked on him were top notch.
As the war progressed, that changed dramatically
for the worse, for himself as well as those captured
Toss into that had of wishes a president that recalls correctly if he or SHE
was shot at during a ME visit and or a president that knows that the people
in Afghanistan don't speed Arabic. Thank you Hillary and Obama
Okay, let's say that's true. So then you must be planning on voting for him
given that you've just said the alternatives are so lousy, right?
Do you hold all candidates to the same standard? Did you recoil from the
Republicans when that carpet-chewing nutball Pat Robertson's organization
worked so closely with Republicans that the Federal Election Commission sued
him over it? Do you lose sleep over the fact that McCain's wife's father
did business with the mob? Should we be troubled that Mike Huckabee was
pastor of a church that didn't admit black members until the 1980s? Or are
embarrassing associations a problem only with candidates you already
Sure, that's how he's come from behind to whomp Hillary, because he looks
better in a suit, that's some real insightful analysis on your part.
Wait, you've already described the other candidates as being so lousy they
make Obama look good, but now you'd rather he didn't win. I'm having
trouble following your logic here, unless what it really comes down to is
there isn't much logic involved.
For the most part I liked Reagan, alas, even if he were alive the
Constitution would prohibit him from becoming President again. Of course
given that the current administration doesn't find the Constitution a
barrier to doing what they want maybe we shouldn't care too much what that
Explain what's real about a supposed libertarian who fought like a hungry
dog for the govt. to go on spending billions on a failed war on drugs and
used every trick in the books to enable the feds to ignore the voters of
states who approved medical marijuana laws? Oh yeah, he's changed his tune
*now* since he'd like to get elected again one day and his medical marijuana
stance already helped cost him his seat in Congress. I'm also curious about
how such a staunch anti-abortionist as Barr agreed to his own wife having an
abortion. And how about his refusal to testify about his extra-marital
affair during his divorce proceedings, kind of odd for a guy who was a
front-runner in the Clinton impeachment effort. He's now on wife number
three but he backed the Defense of Marriage Act 'cause he figures gay
marriage would harm the nation, now that's funny.
Hey, as a rule I think liberal politicians are every bit as crooked,
manipulative and hypocritical as conservative politicians; historically I'm
a conservative voter. But if Barr is your idea of the Real Deal then I have
to wonder what color the sky is on your planet.
No. I plan to vote for Ronald Reagan who - even dead - is better than
any of the above. I want to register my disdain for the choices the
mainstream parties have given me. We desperately need a "None Of The
Above" voting choice on our ballots. If more than 33% of the people
who voted, select that option, the election should be invalid and
require a "do over". I favor a Constitutional Amendment to make this
We should be more than troubled, we should be outraged.
I am consistent in this. The stink is everywhere in politics.
He has NO CONTENT to his speeches. "Change you can believe in?"
C'mon? What change? From what TO what and WHY? How will we pay
for it? He is capitalizing on the boneheaded anti-war sentiment
currently in vogue and the fact that Hillary both did support
the war and won't completely back away from it. So I guess there is one
policy point he can exploit. But he is an empty vessel, with
nothing meaningful to say other than "change, change, change."
That doesn't actually *make* him better, it's a public perception thing.
What is comes down to is that *all* the candidates are lousy and
he is *perceived* as being better than the alternatives. I don't
share that view, but I understand that is *is* the dominant view.
In my opinion he is the most dangerous of the bunch because
he has no specific ideas but a strong affiliation to the general ideation of
the extreme Left.
Don't just blame Bush for that. The rules by which W plays were
put in place LONG before he was even in politics. It was, you'll
recall, the activist political left, that decided the Constitution
was a "living" document to be interpreted as necessary to fit
current conditions. That's all Bush is doing ... he's just
not doing it the way the left elite snobs would like.
Note that I said "appears". I've not had time to dig into his record
deeply yet. If it turns out that you're record is correct I will never
vote for him.
Again, I just saw him announce, and I've not examined the details for
myself. I'm with you. I don't mind people changing their minds
on principle. I mind people using the force of government to
tell me what to do.
Tim Daneliuk email@example.com
That could lead to no administration for years on end, as bad as the govt.
often is that could certainly be worse.
He was a beer distributor in Arizona who took some legal hits in court over
filing falsified paperwork and concealing who he was doing business with
which at that time in that place meant guys with mob ties. It's nothing you
need to bother looking up unless you like spending time on right-wingnut
*and* left-wingnut websites, for some reason both fringes think it's
something they can smear McCain with. I fail to see what it has to do with
McCain, if belonging to a family (in his case just by marriage) that did
business with mobsters was disqualifying then the Kennedys should never have
got anywhere in politics.
On that we are agreed.
Ron Paul says good government is more important than just having a
Republican in the White House and he thinks Obama would be better on foreign
policy than the others. Do you think you have this figured out better than
Paul? Hey, I don't think he's the answer to a maiden's prayer, but I'd sure
rather have him than Hillary. However I don't think he can beat McCain, I
suspect we're looking at McCain in the White House next year with a Democrat
Congress, that should be big fun.
"Boneheaded?" Thousands of dead American soldiers (and many more Iraqis),
hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted, the contempt of most of
the world including allies, an economy in the toilet, massive national debt
(much of it held by China), no WMDs found, the Army and the Marines
stretched to the breaking point--exactly what part of the invasion of Iraq
do you think shouldn't be inspiring anti-war sentiment? "Currently in
vogue," since when is an unjustified and incompetently executed war
something that shouldn't be unpopular? I come from a family with a long
history of military service, I recognize that some wars are necessary, the
invasion of Afghanistan for example was justified as an organization that
actually did attack America was based there. But the justification for
invading Iraq was all smoke and mirrors, the invasion has turned out to be
the worst foreign policy blunder in decades. Do you have kids? They'll be
paying for this until they're old and grey, how happy do you think they'll
be about that?
You and some friends are marching into a swamp infested with alligators and
poison snakes, the slimy water is up to your chin, your feet keep getting
stuck in the mud and it kind of looks like soon you won't be able to move at
all. Somebody suggests changing course and not marching straight into the
swamp any more. Is your response going to be that since they didn't specify
an exact direction you're not going to listen to them?
I don't know if Obama as President will be better, but it's unlikely he
could be any worse. I almost don't care at this point, the Bush admin has
been such a flaming shambles that I'm prepared to let almost anyone have a
crack at doing better, it's too bad Pat Paulsen isn't running.
The extreme left huh? Specifics? What is there in his legislative history
that leads you to believe he's really a lot more radical than most folks
think? His kid does go to school with the child of a guy who used to be in
the Weather Underground, and there's that photo of him not putting his hand
over his heart for the National Anthem, that's pretty damning stuff for
Ah, so your excuse is that because some other kids stole candy too you
shouldn't be blamed for doing it as well, lovely.
Warrantless wiretaps? Secret trials? Citizens declared to be enemy
combatants without due process? We're supposed to just let that stuff go
because of what some previous administrations did?
You won't have to dig far, his history is right there for anyone to find
with a quick web search.
It is sometimes necessary for the common good, we need traffic laws because
without them the streets would be a madhouse. For that matter we need the
streets too, if they were built only in neighborhoods where the residents
could afford them half the country would still be in the 18th century. For
that matter some of it still is.
Almost 10x that number of Americans die *annually* on our highways.
Why are you not similarly exorcised about this and demanding the dismantlement
of this very dangerous environment. It is terrible that people die in
war, combatants and civilians. But the Iraq war demonstrates again the
trend that each major war the US fights, the death toll goes down
(but the injury survival toll goes up). Moreover, every single
solider *volunteered* to serve. We no longer practice the slavery
of the draft.
Nowhere near what we waste on anti-Constitutional entitlements to keep
The debt is much more an artifact of the entitlement spend than it is
military spend, even with the increased cost of the Iraq war. Go look
at any recent budget. Figure out what was spent on military and what
was spent on entitlements. Then pro rate the interest paid on the
The part about thwarting threat in the region before it gets out of
control. I'm with you - we should not be *there* - we should have
rained pain on the Iraqi, Iranian, and Syrian governments by wiping
out their military capacity, public works, and government facilities
by air. Cripple their economies, throw them into complete turmoil
so they have no energy for nukes, funding Hezbollah, attacking Israel,
etc. We don't need boots on the ground there, just cut them off at
their knees. Cheap, effective, and sustainable.
The war was not incompetently executed. The peace was, thanks in part
to the drooling idiots in the State department that insisted we stay
and fix things. Bush is dead wrong on this too. If we were going in,
it should have been to "visit" and he should have stuck by "Mission
My kids are going to be paying far, far, far, far more for the foolish
and greedy demands of healthcare, drug benefits, Social Security,
and Medicare that are not funded at anywhere near the levels needed
to sustain my lazy, money grubbing, unethical generation that is
headed for retirement in a little while.
Of course I will .. but I want to know just WHAT I'm signing up for.
He was entertaining. I'd personally like to see Kinky Friedman run.
How about his attacks on big eeeeeevil corporations making "too much" money?
How about his acknowledgment that reducing taxes stimulates the economy,
but he wants tax rates raised anyway to be more "fair" (as he defines it)?
How about his support for *increasing* foreign aid to suit the UN?
He is far left issue after issue.
No. I think *some* of what W did was wrong and he got remediated
by SCOTUS. I think some of what he did was controversial, but
not obviously wrong. But it is hilarious to watch the lefties
pee themselves because Bush is doing *exactly* what they want to
do all the time: "interpreting" the Constitution for "our time".
I was merely commenting on this irony.
Permitted under FISA. But FISA could not work due to
the paperwork burden. Where were the Dems to help find
a workable alternative? Standing across the street
throwing rocks and complaining (as usual).
There is a long and standing precedent for this during wartime.
Citizens declared to be enemy
Utterly wrong. He's a bozo on this one.
We're supposed to just let that stuff go
No, we're supposed to fight back on principle. Unfortunately,
neither the right nor the left have any principles any more,
so what do you expect?
"Common Good" is the biggest code phrase for collectivism ever devised ...
well, that and "What About The Children?". Government force should be
limited to: Defending the nation, and interdicting when citizens heap force,
fraud, or threat upon each other.
P.S. "The streets" are one of the enumerated powers given the Federal
government in the Constitution because they are "post roads." No foul there.
Tim Daneliuk firstname.lastname@example.org
You are a very hurtful man. I am Ukrainian (a Slav) not Russian
(of more-or-less Finnish blood lines, I am told). My people
are professional victims, theirs are professional predators.
We have hot women. They have great vodka.
Robatoy is Dutch? That's kind of shocking actually...
Tim Daneliuk email@example.com
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.