"Whether Barack Obama wins or loses the White House, his candidacy will have failed to perform the miracle of transcendence it was supposedly going to deliver......The Democrats' perversion of the race issue has gotten so brazen that someone who merely points out the undeniably true -- like Mr. Obama's controversial ties to radicals or felons of any race or nationality -- is accused of racism. Left-wing politicos have opined that racism motivates even Democratic voters who don't support Mr. Obama (as if ideas don't matter), while James Carville, the Dems' talking head from the House of Slytherin, fears rioting if Mr. Obama loses."
— Ruth Ann Dailey, putting the first check in Obama's "loss" column, for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
You know, this should make you wonder: is Chicago so much better because Barack Obama served there for 8 years? Is racism gone? Did the rest of the country miraculously fall in love with Chicago (as so many suggest the world will love us if Barack Obama's president)? Or is Chicago exactly what we've been hearing: a place of corruption, criminality, racism - and race-baiting - and a much-too-comfortable home for terrorists and other assorted America haters?
It's worth thinking about. Seriously, if Barack Obama was such a great pol, we'd have some clear evidence to point to, wouldn't we? But that evidence doesn't exist. (We Republicans have got years and years of John McCain's cost-cutting, anti-pork, and anti-corruption legislation to point to). All Obama's got is souring, empty, speeches - and a lot of clunky, evasive, talk.
Where I come from, we call that "selling wolf tickets", folks.
No comments:
Post a Comment
COMMENTS ARE BACK ON