Jan 24 2008
The Essence of an Obama Idiot
If this moron doesn’t epitomize the kind of vapid idiots that swoon over the clean articulate black candidate (Joe Biden’s words, not mine) I don’t know what does. Gothamist has an interview with Eugene Mirman who, they claim, is a comic. I guess I have no right to argue his occupation, although he’s apparently not a very good one because I’m really into stand up and I’ve never heard of him. Anyway, here are his answers to two questions about the upcoming elections:
Who’s your least favorite Democratic nominee and why? Hillary? I went to a rally of hers in New Hampshire and it was kind of annoying and uninspiring. Though she’s working hard on re-branding herself, so maybe in a month we’ll think we’ve loved her all along?
I’m sure Hillary is smart and would do a pretty good job with policy. I think the problem with her is that when she’s saying what she believes deep down, she feels like she’s lying. But that might be because she’s had to develop a harsh exterior to get to where she has. That’s what Charles Bronson did. However, at least it’s better than Bush, who I’m pretty sure is actually trying to hatch an evil plan. I bet his last words as president will be, “Suckers!” and then he’ll blow up the Statue of Liberty and disappear in a submarine.
Nothing to say except for emtpy rhetorical criticism. But wait, it gets better…
Why Obama? I’d like to apologize in advance for answering this question sincerely. I want two things from a president: 1) an effective, visionary leader with the ability to make America and the world better (i.e. better schools, less enemies, more cash to buy health care and whiskey, etc.) and 2) someone who embodies my ideals (which are great ideals, trust me), and is a gifted, intelligent speaker, who doesn’t seem sneaky and you’re not embarrassed or infuriated when they’re on television.
To me, Obama is those things — he’s smart, inspiring, far less divisive, he compromises to get things done. His opponents (in Illinois) describe him as “reasonable.” I like that. Though he’s passionate, he doesn’t seem ideologically dogmatic, but more a judicious problem solver. He’s fiscally responsible, socially progressive, and a moderate of sorts. Plus, sometimes, he speaks with such force he makes reporters cry. He’s the most inspiring candidate in years. He’s spun as not having enough experience, but he’s actually worked for two decades in public service – regardless, I believe experience is something that is easier gained than wisdom. (George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Ted Nugent being the proof of that). For me, voting for Obama feels like I’m voting for someone, not against another. Ultimately, I guess I like and believe him more than the rest. Maybe he studied with Stanislavski? And Hillary studied kabuki?
Barack Obama is an “effective, visionary leader with the ability to make America and the world better?”
Based on what?
Well, the good news for Eugene is that he’ll never have to explain that because when you say vague flattering things about Obama even if they’re completely sans substance, they’re believed and are not to be questioned. Notice, he has absolutely nothing to say about actual hard policy or experience with regards to Obama. Much like most of his supporters, he buys into the “idea” of Obama and knows nothing about the actual candidate.
At least the primaries and caucuses are proving that people who actually vote aren’t as devoid of thought as the people who talk about who they’re going to vote for.
January 24th, 2008 at 11:34 am
“Notice, he has absolutely nothing to say about actual hard policy or experience with regards to Obama.”
..but my question is, what good is policy experience when you make horrific decisions? - i.e Iraq and Nafta. By the way, how do Hillary supporters feel about her basically running on her Husbands record? She claims all this “experience”, especially when it comes to foreign policy during the 90’s - but I’d bet Madeline Albright would have serious issues with said “experience”. Talk about lack of substance, and mounds of empty rhetoric. Thoughts? “Insignificant thoughts”? Apt title.
January 24th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Apt title? Aren’t you the clever little fuck-knuckle? I’ll bet you think you’re the first one to use that sparklingly brilliant one liner, huh?
Policy experience doesn’t always guarantee success or making the right decision, however, what do Obama’s supporters kool-aid drinkers believe makes him qualified to be President? We keep hearing about all he’s going to do and how visionary he is.
Based.
On.
What?
It’s a very simple question and yet it seems like the answer amounts to a simple “he talks a good game and it makes people happy.” If that’s all it takes for you to vote for a candidate, so be it. I prefer a little more meat on my plate.
As for “experience,” you and I both know Hillary Clinton was more than arm-candy for Bill during his eight years in the White House, and she’s already had eight years of experience in the Senate. Madeline Albright is an absolute idiot and an incompetent dope, so if you’re basing your evaluations of people on her, then there’s very little hope for you.
Keep trolling for Obama, though. It’s fun saving a sinking ship with a bucket.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
“Apt title? Aren’t you the clever little fuck-knuckle?”
“Fuck -knuckle”? Its amazing, the type of classy retorts one learns in the Mountains of West Virginia when they aren’t making love to their sister.
“I’ll bet you think you’re the first one to use that sparklingly brilliant one liner, huh?”
This coming from a bottom-feeding, blubbery vagina who just used the word “fuck-knuckle”..lol
“Policy experience doesn’t always guarantee success or making the right decision, however, what do Obama’s supporters kool-aid drinkers believe makes him qualified to be President?”
He has always been on the right side of issues, Iraq, he was on the right side of Pakistan, his pro-choice record is exemplary - then on Hillary’s end, she was on the wrong side of one of the country’s biggest historical clusterfucks that is Iraq. Yeah, you get beaten to death with all the “he doesn’t come with any substance” rhetoric when you are facing someone who actually knows what they are talking about.
“It’s a very simple question and yet it seems like the answer amounts to a simple “he talks a good game and it makes people happy.””
..but my point is, the facts have a tumultuous relationship with the whole “empty suit” talking point that you clumsily regurgitate.
“If that’s all it takes for you to vote for a candidate, so be it. I prefer a little more meat on my plate.”
Respectfully, eating the wrong meat too long can cause all types of health complications - I respect that you support Hillary, if she becomes the candidate I will vote for her - I just take issue with the assumption that Obama lacks substance.
“As for “experience,” you and I both know Hillary Clinton was more than arm-candy for Bill during his eight years in the White House, and she’s already had eight years of experience in the Senate.”
Well, if you want to break it down - Obama has more years in elected office than Hillary. That being said, the only thing that Hillary had her name on in the 90’s was her attempt to reform health care - and that was a complete and utter debacle.
“Keep trolling for Obama, though. It’s fun saving a sinking ship with a bucket.”
Keep having yet another hackey pro-Hillary site, filled with distortions and half-truths about a candidate who lacks the intestinal fortitude to run on her own record. A special type of cowardice that we don’t need in a President.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
“hackey?”
At least learn to spell 5th grade words before you drop by again.
As for the rest of your points, they’re just as vapid as Barack, so don’t bother commenting anymore, I’ll just delete them. After all, we wouldn’t want your brilliance to be too much for this “hackey” site.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Dude, do you even know why you’re supporting Hillary? lol
January 24th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Dude, do you even know why you’re supporting Obama?
Obama’s campaign, in so many ways, is predicated on an unspoken convenience. I’m sure it was very difficult for him to oppose the war in Iraq while he was fucking around in Illinois as a lowly state legislator.
Throughout his ‘extensive’ career, how many times has he ACTUALLY PROTECTED a woman’s right to choose? Once? Twice? Never? My guess: Infrequently. This is likely because he has yet to be exposed to serious attempts to undermine a woman’s right to choose. So, please, don’t tout his pro-choice beliefs as a serious credential. It doesn’t take much ‘intestinal fortitude’ to espouse an ideology. It does, however, take courage to act in accordance with one’s ideals.
By the way, how is Obama suddenly a foreign policy expert? Does anyone remember how hordes of people jeered and booed him when he made a ‘rootsy’ trip to Kenya?
Does anybody realize that he isn’t even 2/3 of the way into his 1ST term in the Senate? Where is he getting all of this (relevant) experience? Maybe I should just vote for the fat, nosey, cheap-cigarette-smoking bitch next door because she happens to be MY community organizer…
On that thought…how is he anything but someone who has delivered a few great speeches?
To be honest, I like the guy. We share many of the same beliefs and I believe in his ability to reconcile this divided country. He is probably the most inspirational presidential candidate in more than a few generations. But, please, don’t inflate his record. It’s not fair.
Now, what really grinds my gears is a self appreciating douche bag who turns an issues-oriented discussion into an exhibition of one-upsmanship and half-clever remarks.
If you’d like to learn more about Hillary’s TRULY extensive career, I suggest that you find the October edition of Esquire, in which is a great article about Hillary’s heavy involvement in her husband’s presidency -much to Al Gore’s dismay.
January 24th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
“Where is he getting all of this (relevant) experience?”
Well, he was an international relations major in college. That kind of helps.
That reminds me, a friend of mine has a bachelors degree in business, yet with no experience he’s having trouble immediately becoming the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.
DISCLAIMER: The last two remarks were dripping with sarcasm, although on the first one, Obama himself actually cited his major in college as experience in an interview.
January 24th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
The ‘Out with the old, in with the new’ theme is great and it certainly elevates some viable issues, but experience is an asset, not a liability. That’s the one thing that really bothers me about Obama’s campaign.
January 24th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Vinny,
You call Obama supporters “kool-aid drinkers” but you seem to be quoting the Clinton playbook verbatim in your post.
How much is experience really an issue for YOU versus how much is it part of the Clinton campaign talking points? When it comes to experience, Bill Richardson beat Obama, Clinton and Edwards hands down, yet you don’t support him. If it comes down to Hillary and say, McCain, you must surely vote for McCain because he has A LOT more experience than Mrs. Clinton.
I don’t think you care about experience. I think you just support Hillary and are espousing her campaign’s “Rovian tactics.” You use insult instead of facts, put-downs instead of debate, you attack instead of persuade.
If I may address a few other points from some of your “non-deleted comments”:
Patrick wrote: “I’m sure it was very difficult for him to oppose the war in Iraq while he was fucking around in Illinois as a lowly state legislator.”
Actually Barack Obama was running for US Senate when he opposed the war; taking an unpopular position while running for office is pretty ballsy and speaks to his principals, not his political gains.
“Throughout his ‘extensive’ career, how many times has he ACTUALLY PROTECTED a woman’s right to choose? Once? Twice? Never? My guess: Infrequently.”
A Google Search of “Obama abortion issues” finds this from the NYTimes (12/20/07):
Pam Sutherland, president of Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, said Mr. Obama was one of the senators with a strong stand for abortion rights whom the organization approached about using the strategy. Ms. Sutherland said the Republicans were trying to force Democrats from conservative districts to register politically controversial no votes.
Ms. Sutherland said Mr. Obama had initially resisted the strategy because he wanted to vote against the anti-abortion measures.
“He said, ‘I’m opposed to this,’” she recalled.
But the organization argued that a present vote would be difficult for Republicans to use in campaign literature against Democrats from moderate and conservative districts who favored abortion rights.
Lisa Madigan, the Illinois attorney general who was in the Illinois Senate with Mr. Obama from 1998 through 2002, said she and Mr. Obama voted present on the anti-abortion bills.
“It’s just plain wrong to imply that voting present reflected a lack of leadership,” Ms. Madigan said. “In fact, it was the exact opposite.”
Let’s talk about Obama’s experience. I am not going to make a case of who has more experience. The argument from the Clinton’s and your blog, is that Obama has none, especially in foreign relations, much like a young Arkansas Governor in 1992.
Obama has held an elected office for 12 years, first as an Illinois State Senator and then as US Senator. Before that he was a community organizer among Chicago’s poor, and then a civil rights lawyer. I would say he has been busy experiencing politics and civil service for quite a while.
Why does 8 years as a US Senator and 8 years as First Lady trump this? Is it because there is a 4 year difference?
But here’s the big thing for me, if I haven’t been deleted yet: Hillary is divisive. People will not work with her. People have worked with Obama, both Republicans and Democrats in the Illinois State Senate. His voting record is consistent with his message of unification. If you want change, why not try something new?
Yes, Obama’s message “sounds good”; so did Kennedy’s. When Obama speaks he moves people; people who are tired of bickering and infighting, who want a country they can be proud of. What is wrong with being inspired when a man speaks? What would he have to say to be acceptable to you? Inspiration is what drives us to do things. It inspired me to read about him, to research his experience and his platform. Hell, you inspired me to respond to your post.
Finally, Eugene Mirman is a very funny comedian. Just because you haven’t heard of him, doesn’t mean he’s not very good. It means you don’t follow that type of comedy. You are employing faulty logic. For example: I have never heard of your blog and I am really into blogging. Does that make you “not a very good blogger?”
January 24th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Hey Don,
“Actually Barack Obama was running for US Senate when he opposed the war.”
Sure, that’s correct. The problem, though, is that it WAS easy to maintain that position in 2004. Please don’t tell me that it was a political liability to oppose the war while running for a Senate seat in blue Illinois. Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t John Kerry oppose the war in the same election cycle…?
“A Google Search of “Obama abortion issues” finds this from the NYTimes (12/20/07):…”
Great, you proved my point. I never said that he neglected the issue. I did say that he should not yet be canonized as a grand protector of a woman’s right to choose. As I previously explained, he has had limited exposure (in legislative terms) to the issue. If he had spent the last three years as a member the Senate Judiciary Committee, maybe…
Also, your statement about Hillary’s experience was somewhat accurate, but it wasn’t really fair.
She was probably the most active First Lady since Eleanore Roosevelt; possibly the most influential First Lady of all time. Her penchant for cabinet-level briefings and her leadership on significant issues (e.g. healthcare) is well documented.
January 25th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Obama’s the anti-christ. I’m serious!
I’m either not voting this time around, or I’m voting for Huckabee. Yeah, I’m one of _those_ guys.
February 4th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Obama has been an elected official longer than Hillary.
Obama worked his way though the American dream. I’d say that gives him more real experience. Hillary was carried to where she was.
Regardless of how she is using her position, good or bad, she got there on the coattails of others. Obama started a normal kid and achieved greatness.
Obama spent his early years as a community organizer. Hillary spent her early years as a political figure which included a cush job on the board of wal-mart.
February 5th, 2008 at 12:21 am
Don… if you’re here, you must have heard of Vin’s blog. See what I did there?
July 24th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
You’re amazingly bitter. It will be *fun* to watch amazingly bitter Republicans getting their richly-deserved commuppance in November. Man, you’re going to lose epically.
Still don’t quite get that your ideology is benchmarked and widely regarded as a total failure, do you.
July 24th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Wait, just because I don’t like Obama, I’m a Republican?
Are you really that fucking stupid?
Oh wait, you’re an Obama supporter. Question answered.