The Messiah will crash.

Why do I get the feeling he is running for “Dictator” rather than President?

An emtey suit—A product of the lefi wing Chicago
based arm of the party with no credentials nationally and certainly not internationally.
What do they expect? He is going to lose—not as a Demacrat but as a radical socialist with anti American support.
He does not expound American values—Niether for Demacrat or Republican.
You reap what you sow!!!!

I think now that Cynthia McKinney has co-opted the far, FAR left fringe with her Green Party candidacy, Obama’s chances are reduced even a bit more.

God forbid he is elected. But worst case, that would be followed by a power shift in Congress in 2010, and possibly an impeachment.

Those who think George W is incompetent haven’t seen real incompetence yet.

Thus saith the Lord:  Obama is in danger of hell-fire.

With every gripe and groan about Obama coming from the minority of extreme Lefty Loons that currently control the Democratic Party – - the more I’m getting to like him!

By today’s standards, and for the most part, JFK was a political traditionalist and a ‘conservative’ Democrat.  The more Obama begins to track along that line – - the more likely I am to vote for him.

TK – Obama has backed off his radical-left rhetoric now that he figures he has the nomination sewn up. He will have to appear to move back toward center in order to get elected.

The trouble is, that’s at odds with his voting record in the Senate, and much of what he and his so-called “surrogates” have been saying lately.

Example: he has voted for every anti-gun measure that has come before him, and (along with Hillary) was one of only a tiny minority who did not sign Cheney’s amicus brief in the recent Heller case, supporting the notion of the right to keep and bear arms as an individual right. Yet 48 hours had not passed after the Heller decision was handed down, and here was Senator Obama saying he views (and has always viewed) the Second Amendment as referring to an individual right.

The same was true of his big speech in Grand Rapids, when he got endorsed by Edwards. Obama was so busy spouting all the popular liberal buzzwords that he apparently did not realize that some of his “promises” were in direct conflict with others he’d made only a sentence or two before.

The man apparently has the power to hypnotize audiences into hearing what they want to hear, and ignoring anything that doesn’t resonate with that. He’s a chameleon, and quite adept at playing to the short attention spans and inability to think that pervade America these days.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but if you think he looks good, there’s a flaw in your thinking.

You want a “conservative Democrat,” look to Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller.

Obama is a conceited ego-maniac. He has done nothing during his short term in the senate, other than run for president. He has not sponsored any legislation.  He thinks he is entitled to the presidency by virtue of the fact that he is black.  He cant be criticized because then you are labeled a racist.
Well, the guy has no experience and has nothing substantial to say—all that hope is HYPE.  People are so gullible and ignorant. He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.  He offers nothing new, except the same old socialist liberal positions.
He will say and do anything to get elected—a man of no conviction, no experience, no trustworthiness. The only reason he has gotten this far is because the liberal media has supported him and covered up for him. I hope 527’s will hit him hard before the election so that people can see Obama for what he really is.

Why doesn’t the mainstream media report that “Obama Miffs Democrats”?  Because both Obama and the MSM are wholly owned subsidiaries of the big corporations.

God, help us.

http://www.justsaynodeal.com

http://ww.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Summer08/BushThirdTerm.html

I think there has been too much attention layed on both Obama and Hillary Clinton by the mainstream media….they both talk of experience etc and neither one is really qualified to lead this country…they continually talk of McCain being Bush,s third term without recognizing there own ploy with Hillary and Bill Clinton.  I blame the Demo Party’s “win at any cost” for this.

                thank you
                A former Democrat

Blogger – Truthfully, EWVERBODY looks better to me than G.W.Bush! Except – - as you suggested – - Joe Lieberman and Zell Miller – - who both seem to be nothing more than caricaturish versions of a senile Don Rickles.  And, truthfully, while I have probably voted Republican about 50% of the times that I’ve voted over the years – - my personal opinion is that after the fiasco of the last eight years – - the Republicans don’t deserve to win the presidency again for quite some time! 

(I could have/would have voted for McCain in 2000 – - and believe he would have been an infinitely better president over the past eight years than Bush II – - but, he’s lost his individuality, changed far too many of his tunes, and simply gotten too old and way too “handled” for me.)

I do find Obama “iffy” in some of the ways you have suggested, but his “iffiness” is probably no worse than other candidates who have come along up to this point in presidential campaigns.  I didn’t vote for the Texas Ranger in 2000 because he was DEFINITELY far too “iffy” – - and I think he has set the standard to date for “iffiness” gone ALL bad!

I would have been much more satisfied if my choice at this point in time was between Clinton and Huckabee.

In the end, two of my big issues are failures in international and doemstic “economic policy” and putting an absolute end to “illegal immigration” – - and neither Obama nor McCain will do anything significant to eliminate the problems in either area. 

Maybe I’ll just write-in Ron Paul’s name and fugeddaboudit!

To “A Former Democrat”:

I’m a former Democrat – - AND a former Republican – - and, while I do think much of the media is a willing participant in what you complain about – - in terms of their throwing objectivity and accurate reporting to the four winds – - I think their conduct is a symptom of the real problem and not ‘the’ cause.

I think the actual cause of the problem to which you refer is very simple: abject, ideologically-based, super-extreme, personal and political partisanship.

I believe the current iteration of this problem began when the GOPs took over the Congress in ‘94 and chose to blatantly assert, exercise, and celebrate their newfound authority (after 40 years of being in the minority) – - and then, unfortunately, also chose to rub the Dems’ noses in it!

And, continuing, after the ‘98-‘99 ‘Clinton Affair’ and, especially, the 2000 election debacle – - the Dems actively began to develop similar inclinations and began to finally fight back on the same nasty and partisanship-run-amok terms (with some liberal media and online support – - while the GOPS used conservative PACs and talk radio support – - to push their agendas).

Then, of course, in ‘04, the ‘Swiftboaters’ bag of BS pushed party partisanship up to new levels – - to ‘total’, ‘get-even’, ‘middle-school-styled’, ‘political party warfare’ – - much to the delight of the freaked-out minority extremists that have controlled both parties in recent years.

Consequently, neither party represents a true majority – - and us former Democrats, former Republicans, and now-committed Independents are left with no one who actually speaks for the 40% of us politically-unaligned, moderate, middle-of-the-road, working class Americans!

The pox on both parties!

(Note that the ‘liberal’ cable TV and print media are not yet at the level of vitriol, venom and vertigo as is ‘conservative’ talk radio or the ‘conservative’ PACs (like the ‘Swiftboaters’) – - but ‘liberal’ websites are quickly filling in the gap.  In the end, EVERYBODY loses!)