Tuesday, February 12, 2008

OBAMA'S CUBAN FLAG, EMPTY RHETORIC


Picture from NewsBusters (via Race42008) of an Obama campaign office in Houston. Note the Cuban flag with the picture of Communist fanatic Che Guevara superimposed.

I'VE BEEN GETTING QUESTIONS ON THE FLAG ABOVE. THE LINKS BELOW WILL ALLOW YOU TO SEE THE DETAILS UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL. I'LL BE WRITING MORE ON THIS SUBJECT WEDNESDAY.


http://www.myfoxhouston.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=5700252&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1

It [[the flag story] was on the news in Houston. Above is the video from Fox Houston showing the flag in the background of Obama's office that was linked from Newsbusters at http://newsbusters.org/blogs/d-s-hube/2008/02/11/another-flag-issue-obama

THIS IS THE SAME OBAMA THAT REFUSES TO WEAR AN AMERICAN FLAG PIN ON HIS LAPEL. HE ALSO HAS A PROBLEM PUTTING HIS HAND OVER HIS HEART DURING THE PLAYING OF THE NATIONAL ANTHEM.


I'll build on this column throughout Tuesday, February 12, 2008 and will be writing the entire week on the two Democratic contenders, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I've been writing for nearly a year about how Hillary Clinton will be the nominee. However, I'm much (much, much) less certain of that. Frankly, if Mrs. Clinton doesn't win in Ohio and Texas next month, she probably won't get the nomination.

The numbers are working against her. When she loses all three races today (MD, VA, and DC) in the "Potomac Primaries," that will be TEN losses in a row. When you're on that kind of losing streak, it's hard to see the trend coming to an end. The Democratic Establishment recognizes Obama's limitations, and they don't really want him to be the standard-bearer, but in the end they might not have a choice.

As a speaker, Mrs. Clinton reminds us of the proverbial fingernail scratching on a blackboard (now apparently known as "whiteboards"). In contrast, Barack Obama comes across as the silver-tongued orator. Where he fails is in what Martin Luther King called "the content of his character." His main commitment seems to be bamboozling the American people with pretty words. He relies on feel-good rhetoric to sell himself politically. He talks the talk but he doesn't truly walk the walk.

For example, Obama's stump speech begins with these words: "We are at a defining moment in our history." Some Democrats seem to find that statement to be profound. Actually, it's a clanking cliche that foreshadows presentations light on content and heavy on sanctimony.

Obama drenches his Democratic audiences in rhetorical syrup ("Yes we can!"), and they lap it up. But what do the pretty words actually mean? Do his stirring speeches stand up to any kind of examination?



Yesterday on TV, he said, "Change does not happen from the top down. Change happens from the bottom up."



A cynic (like me) might say, "I guess his belief in generating from the bottom-up is why he's running for a low-level office like President of the United States." His statement certainly doesn't apply to the candidate himself.




He likes to tell us that "Washington is broken," implying that he (and his Party) have little if anything to do with Washington, DC. He forgets to add that he -- and his main political allies -- are charter members of the Beltway Gang. He doesn't delve into how people like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are part of the fractured government.




Obama always begins his stump speech with the following words: "We are at a defining moment in our history." Oh, really? A few unsophisticated people might regard that hoary cliche as somehow uplifting. In fact, every generation has heard the same thing from politicians. It's like Macbeth's "tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."





Senator Obama has made himself a very wealthy man by giving speeches and selling books, particularly his The Audacity of Hope, for which he received an advance payment of $1.9 million. However audacious his own hopes, Obama's main characteristic is the emptiness of his rhetoric.



Granted, he never quite reaches the total inauthenticity of Hillary Clinton, but he comes close. The more one examines what Obama says, the less content there is. Without specifics, his stock-in-trade concepts like "hope" and "change" have no meaning. He's floating to the top on a stream of vast emptiness.








OBAMA WEARING THE FLIP-FLOPS ON TIME-TABLES:

Team McCain is chuckling over a comment from Barack Obama last night on "60 Minutes": http://cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/07/60minutes/main3804268_page2.shtml


"At a time when American casualties are down, at a time when the violence is down, particularly affecting the Iraqi population, is that the right time to try and set time tables for withdrawing all American troops? I mean you talked about…the end of 2009," [Steve] Kroft remarked.

[Obama said] "Yeah, absolutely. I think now is precisely the time. I think that it is very important for us to send a clear signal to the Iraqis that we are not gonna be here permanently. We're not gonna set up permanent bases. That they are going to have to resolve their differences and get their country functioning."

"And you pull out according to that time table, regardless of the situation? Even if there’s serious sectarian violence?" Kroft asked.

"No, I always reserve as commander in chief, the right to assess the situation," Obama replied.


First he's for timetables, then he isn't. As one McCainiac just put it to me, "Shades of John Kerry. We already beat this guy. The last thing we need right now is indecisiveness."


Obama can ask Mitt Romney about how merciless McCain is when it comes to reading into his opponents' words on timetables.


Tomorrow's column on Barack Obama's supposed commitment to "universal health care." Question: if he's for it, why did he vote against mandating physician assistance in the case of "botched" abortions when a child is born alive? I hope it's not "audacious" to ask that obvious question.

11 comments:

Daltonsbriefs said...

Thanks for the photo, that says a lot in one picture.

Thanks for the links to Sarah Palin too, a very interesting possible choice for VP

Stephen R. Maloney said...

Dear Dalton, I'll visit your blog soon. I will have a lot more to say about Senator Obama this week and also about the Guevara photo. As you know, Fidel Castro is condemning Senator McCain for saying Castro, a brutal dictator, is in fact a brutal dicatator. Thanks for visiting and commenting.

steve maloney

Christopher said...

WWCE? Who Would Castro Endorse??? A general election question worth thinking about.

About the primary, I hope Clinton wins (OH, PA, TX). I actually think Clinton and Obama would both get the same numbers (I'll be writing why later) aganist McCain but Clinton by far would be a better President. It's clear from her detailed policy ideas and from her foreign policy stands that she's the only adult out of the two.

Still McCain blows both away.

Stephen R. Maloney said...

I agree that Clinton would make a better President, but unfortunately that's not saying a whole lot. Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez obviously would enjoy an Obama presidency. They'd say "roll over" and Barack would assume the position. :-) What kind of support would he have in the Democratic Party for a strong foreign policy? By the way, I urge everyone to read Christopher's fine columns at: http://youngrepublican.townhall.com. Christopher is clear-minded and writes some of the most intriguing columns on the Net.

steve maloney

Daltonsbriefs said...

Thanks again for visiting regularly at our sites here in Indiana. The more I think about Obama the more I feel comfortable that once people get to know him, they'll be scared.

But watch out for Hillary, I don't think she's done yet.

Stephen R. Maloney said...

Obama, the "universal health care" man voted in IL against giving medical aid to children born alive after botched abortions. He is a phony and a menace. Thanks for visiting!

steve maloney

colecurtis said...

i consider obama a communist and i do not consider him an american by any strech of the imagination. He is a spoiler and if not a communist then a communist sympathizer at the least. I stole your article so all the foreign nationals that are passing through can pick it up and carry it back to their countries with them I hope that you don't mind I left your name on it. I don't want the story just to spread it.
V

Stephen R. Maloney said...

Cole and Others: Anything I post is open to use and reprinting by anyone else. I'm trying to present material as factually and honestly as possible. I'm honored when anyone wants to use my postings. I notice I'm getting a lot of visitors from Brazil, which is great. I will be writing about Obama throughout this week and perhaps for months. See today's column.

Anonymous said...

That's it? Some irrelevant flag nonsense put up by some nobody in one of a thousand campaign offices? Leave it to the Fox network to bring us the most important news (lol). What exactly does this tell us about Obama? That he's supported by a variety of people with a variety of political views? That he doesn't spend his time harassing and trying to control everything his volunteers do? That he respects our American right to put up whatever the hell you want on your damn wall? "In fact, the office in question is run and funded by Obama volunteers and is not sanctioned by the official Obama campaign" (http://mediamatters.org/items/200802130007). Your other arguments are even less substantial. How sad that you must criticize his speeches that so many people find so inspiring. Why don't you try looking up his actual policy positions that are detailed on his website? I guess it's much easier to shoot down a strawman than to have to actually make a well-reasoned argument, especially when you're arguing for things like tax cuts for the wealthy. And small-minded "conservatives" in this country have no limit on their strawmen - each one playing into another ignorant, prejudice fear. Well guess what? You're going to have to come up with something better than that if you want to convince someone other than your readers that have obviously already settled on their narrow little worldview. The truth is most people have had it with your version of divisive patriotism. So keep throwing out your red herrings but realize that you're only preaching to your ignorant choir. You'll realize soon enough that while y'all are working yourselves up into a self righteous frenzy, the rest of the congregation isn't with you anymore.

Stephen R. Maloney said...

I believe Barack Obama, as Christopher suggests, is a man after Castro's and Che's own hearts. They could "roll" him like a rubber ball. Glad you enjoyed a glimpse into one significant types of Obama supporters. I usually don't print "Anonymous" comments, but you used so much of your crayon on this that I'll make an exception. Obama had better be prepared to get his nose rubbed in "it."

steve maloney
ambridge, pa

"A picture is worth a thousand words."

Anonymous said...

Obama really understands what it's like for us gay ex-drug users. We've been persecuted by this racist U.S. government and held down long enough. We're not going to stay at the bottom anymore! Now it's our turn to rule! See why Obams's our best hope in this election: http://www.mahalo.com/Larry_Sinclair