You Won't Cut Me Like You Did Before; It's Always Bittersweet

Over at TNR, John B. Judis un-spins Barack Obama's "they're bitter" gaffe in a fairly convincing manner. He posits that conservative whites whom the Democrats have had trouble with since the 1970s vote for Democrats in three circumstances: if the Republican is unacceptable (and hard to identify with), if the Democrat is acceptable, or if the Democrat is empathetic. Democrats lost their first shot when Republicans nominated the acceptable, beloved McCain. They weren't going to nominate an acceptable candidate once the race narrowed to two liberal senators. So their hope was to nominate an empathetic candidate: And Obama's squandered that.

Obama does have an astounding eloquence, and an ability to put a position across, but that eloquence has been reserved largely for anti-war and good-government positions. His stance against the war may resonate (though that will depend on whether McCain's qualification as commander-in-chief trumps his unpopular stance on the war). But where McCain is most vulnerable and where voters are most likely to smile on a Democrat--on everyday economic issues--Obama's heart doesn't appear to be in it.

These difficulties were clear before Obama spoke in San Francisco, but they're much more glaring now. In the speech, Obama appeared to say that Pennsylvania voters' opposition to gun control or abortion or immigration or free trade was pathological--a product of what Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse once called "false consciousness." On the other hand, he implied that when he voiced opposition to an issue like free trade--Obama has consistently hammered Clinton on her support for the North American Free Trade Agreement--he was simply pandering to these voters' displaced anxieties. He was saying to these upscale San Francisco Democrats, "I am really one of you, and I am not one of them."

Mickey Kaus put together a tougher analysis, arguing (perceptively) that Obama would have been fine if he hadn't lumped guns and religion in with things that are clearly bad, like racial animus.

At the CNN "Compassion Forum" Obama said he wasn't disparaging religion because he meant people "cling" to it in a good way! Would that be the same way they "cling" to "antipathy to people who aren't like them"--the very next phrase Obama uttered? Is racism one of those "traditions that are passed on from generation to generation" that "sustains us"? Obama's unfortunate parallelism makes it hard for him to extricate him from the charge that he was dissing rural Pennsylvanians' excess religiosity.

Ah, but here's the punchline.

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton has stalled Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's drive in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary and holds a 50 - 44 percent lead among likely primary voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today, unchanged from April 8 results.

There was no noticeable change in the matchup in polling April 12 - 13, following widespread media reports on Sen. Obama's 'bitter' comments.

Obama lost a grand total of one point over the week, and the internals are worth checking out. Obama's stabilization is actually a surge in black and Philadelphia support matched by a little dip among suburban voters. Those Appalachian and north Pennsylvania small-towners dislike Obama as much as ever, while people in Pittsburgh and the center of the state (where the biggest city is liberal State College) are split between the two candidates. (When I stopped by Mifflintown, an up-and-coming small burg that's close enough to State College that its hotels get booked when a football game comes up, the only Democratic sign I saw was for Obama.) The controversy is simply hardening the biases that these voters held before it started.

Headline explained here:

Comments

SugarFree | April 15, 2008, 3:30pm | #

Obama committed the cardinal sin of politics: He Told The Truth.

javier | April 15, 2008, 3:36pm | #

sugarfree,

I disagree. While I am from Iowa and not the rust belt we still like our guns too. The problem I saw was that he seem to say that we have guns because of our economic problems (even though iowa is not as worse off as pennsylvania and we still own them), which I guess means that if the rust belt were just better off they wouldn't like guns, completely missing the point that it is a tradition independent from economic status. Same with immigrant bias, rick people at least in Iowa, are just as uncomfortable with a foreign population coming in as the poor folk. That has more to do with us never experience this type of immigrant influx since the 1860's when the germans ran into the scandanavians.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 3:39pm | #

If you mean by telling the truth that he was admitting his contempt for those "beneath" him, then yea, I can go along with that assessment.

Now I am even more bitter.

BakedPenguin | April 15, 2008, 3:43pm | #

Now I am even more bitter.

What are you waiting for? Go get your gun and start praying.

Kolohe | April 15, 2008, 3:46pm | #

"the acceptable, beloved McCain."

Huh?

I grant you the first adjective, due to him continuing to do a decent job in his ongoing effort in placating his former detractors in the republican base.

"beloved", though? I don't think so.

Taktix® | April 15, 2008, 3:46pm | #

Obama committed the cardinal sin of politics: He Told The Truth.

I thought it was "always let the British win."

Kolohe | April 15, 2008, 3:51pm | #

Sorry, I see now that Weigel was just summarizing Judis's arguments.

SugarFree | April 15, 2008, 3:53pm | #

I hate to pull the "I Live In Kentucky" card, but I will in this case. Paranoid gun nuts*, reactionary religious beliefs, xenophobia, and general fear of anything "grandpappy" didn't have runs rampant in the rural sections of this country and are often smooshed together into big ball.

It isn't everybody, they aren't even a majority, but they vote in large numbers and are the basis of politics in the South. Obama spelled it out rather than resorting to a euphemism like Dixiecrat, blue dog Democrat, or just good ole' redneck.

Anyone who doesn't have a problem with McCain talking about "coastal elites," shouldn't have a problem with Obama highlight the opposite problem in blue collar populations.

*I thinking of the real phenomenon of the well-armed hick who stands ready to protect his daughter's virtue from "Nigras!"

SugarFree | April 15, 2008, 3:55pm | #

And besides... 99.9% of people upset by Obama's comments weren't going to vote for him anyway.

It might have been impolitic for him to say it, but I doubt it's really going to hurt him much.

Elemenope | April 15, 2008, 3:58pm | #

Flog, flog, flog, FLOG, flog, fflllloooooogggg...

Man, this one just doesn't stop giving, does it? And all because a guy had the temerity to point out that people behave irrationally when they are angry.

What a bastard.

Other Matt | April 15, 2008, 3:59pm | #

Obama committed the cardinal sin of politics: He Told The Truth.

I thought it was "always let the British win."

Perhaps his truth is to let the British win?

It makes sense why he avoids any comment of substance, when he makes one, it shows his real belief system. It won't hurt in the primary, idiots like joe won't be swayed if he was a child molesting satan worshipper who shipped off four thousand whites to a gas chamber. Hence, joe's an idiot, but to his credit if it were black people he'd feign upset.

In the general election, this stuff will come back if he makes that far.

McClum | April 15, 2008, 4:01pm | #

Obama is being manhandled by the press. They need something new to talk about every couple of days. This is just what came along and they have blown it way out of proportion. He was not denigrating small town America he was saying that we are disillusioned and desperate for a real government that works for everyday Americans.

After 7 years of being duped and dragged through the mud by G. W. our economy is in the worst shape since the depression, we are hatted abroad and our family members serving in the military are facing extreme danger in Iraq. Of course I feel a little bitter and disillusioned about what government can and will do to make things better.

Come on guys, forget the kitchen sink, Clinton is throwing the toilet now!

John | April 15, 2008, 4:05pm | #

There was nothing truthful about what he said. It was a really bizarre thing to say. It was something that only someone who has no understanding of the places and people Obama was describing could make. People don't turn to guns and religion because times are hard. The people Obama is talking about only started voting on cultural issues and gun control when people like Obama started shoving their views on these issues down everyone's throat. No one voted on gun issues in the 1960s because no one was trying to ban guns like Obama was in 1990s Chicago. No one voted on gay marriage in the 1960s because no one thought there were such a thing let alone a Constitutional right. No one voted on abortion in the 1960s because it was still left up to the states to regulate and so forth.

The worst part of the statement was the utter contempt and dismissal of anyone who disagrees with Saint Obama on these issues. In Obama world people don't believe in the right to bear arms or object to NAFTA or open boarders because it is in their interest or because reasonable people can disagree about such issues. No, they think these things because they are poor and bitter about their situation and cling to them in the face indifference by greedy politicians because no sane person could believe such things. All Obama had to say was "I disagree with a lot of people in these areas about some things like guns and cultural issues. But that doesn't matter because I agree with them about other things that are important to and once more I am the only person in this race that understands the things that we do agree on", he wouldn't be in this mess and would be sailing right now. But Obama couldn't say that because I honestly wonder if he has ever known or been close to anyone who doesn't share his world view. Thus, he doesn't understand how any rational person could believe these things.

P Brooks | April 15, 2008, 4:08pm | #

The controversy is simply hardening the biases that these voters held before it started.

As I said at some point over the weekend, I do not believe Obama is dumb enough to pretend he can say something in a "closed door" function without it getting wide circulation. Maybe he expected his comments in San Francisco would be a net positive in the long run.

He may have been surprised at the intensity of the reaction, but after Ohio, he probably figured there would be some votes he just couldn't expect to get.

Vanessa | April 15, 2008, 4:09pm | #

A Hoodoo Gurus reference to warm my little alternative 80s heart!

I think Obama was partially right. But you can't put small town America's love of God and guns all down to economic loss and stagnation.

Maybe my point was already made a few times on the 700+ thread that ran over the weekend?

Plus, no fair secretly recording a speech at a private fundraiser.

Gilbert Martin | April 15, 2008, 4:11pm | #

Obama was speaking in a closed door meeting to a group of far leftists who think just like he does so he let is guard down and said what he really thinks.

And Obama is a far left liberal despite his attempts to craft an image of being some transcendent figure above partisan politics and a "uniter". He has the most liberal voting record in the Senate.

Arrogance and condescension are the hallmark of the mindset of liberals like Obama - and the group he was addressing.

They view themselves as the enlightened ones who not only know what is best for themselves but for everyone else as well.

In their view, the ignorant rubes let themselves be distracted by non-economic issues like guns and/or religion instead of supporting socialist policies favored by the liberal elite that are (in the liberal's mind's) what is really in these people's best interest.

Of course the fact that the liberals have never actually accomplished anything that proves they know what anyone else's self interests are better than the other person does himself and have never actually proven that any of the socialist policies they favor have ever been a success in any way never enters their conciousness.

John | April 15, 2008, 4:11pm | #

"As I said at some point over the weekend, I do not believe Obama is dumb enough to pretend he can say something in a "closed door" function without it getting wide circulation."

I don't think he thought that it would never get out. I think he never thought in a million years there would be such a backlash. Think about who Obama is. The guy is a elite educated community organizer and politician in Chicago. I seriously doubt he has ever known the kind of person who would find these comments objectionable. It is not like Obama has spent the last 20 years hanging out at some small town beer joing taking in the local culture. I would bet money that no one was more shocked about this thing blowing up than Obama himself.

Kolohe | April 15, 2008, 4:11pm | #

I thought it was "always let the British win."

I thought it was wookies.

Pro Libertate | April 15, 2008, 4:15pm | #

Our economy isn't even remotely in the worst shape since the Depression. Where do people come up with these ideas? We're in a recession and have a burst bubble to clean up after. Nothing catastrophic. . .unless we see futile and aggressive attempts to redistribute wealth by a Democratic Congress and president. Then maybe things could get worse. Nixon's price controls helped make a real economic disaster--the 1970s--much, much worse.

Free The Orange Line One! | April 15, 2008, 4:18pm | #

At this point, the only reason I don't spend all day laughing is that unless She pulls it out we're looking at PresidentMcCain. And, no one who thinks that through wants that.

As for Obama's bitterness comments, they're just one of a string of attempts to deceive. Not only that, but eventually the fact that he was one of the few supposedly mainstream leaders to appear at the MillionManMarch is going to eventually sink into the national consciousness. Maybe someone might come up with a photo of him from the march.

I'll repeat again: he stands about a 0.1% (and dropping) chance of being elected. It's almost comical how dumb many Dems are.

John | April 15, 2008, 4:19pm | #

Pro,

In 1996 when Bill Clinton ran on what was universally called a "booming economy" the unemployment rate was 5.3%. Today in our "Bush Recession" it is 5.2%. In some ways we are victims of our own success. It has been since 1982 when the country last suffered a really significant recession. I think a lot of people have forgotten what hard times actually look like and thus believe a lot of gloom and doom bullshit put out by the media.

hale | April 15, 2008, 4:19pm | #

Obama's comments were archly stupid. Never, ever diagnose constituent groups' interests, as though they were part of a disease; it will almost invariably infuriate the people you diagnose, and it will make everyone else justifiably suspicious. "I wonder about me," they'll say. It shatters the illusion; they are then keenly reminded that the candidate is a powerful Washington figure - not someone who laughs at the same humor and watches the same television shows, which is what every politician needs people to think, at least subliminally.

Clinton's response, however, has been an inexplicable tack into the rhetorical winds blowing out of the right wing c. 2004, combined with a Kerry-esque photo-op splurge to prove she's blue collar and down with the folks. She even claimed to hunt ducks. Seriously. Despite damaging Obama's campaign, she hasn't helped her own at all - she sounds more like the mean-spirited school superintendent than she ever has before, and she's added "stereotypical insecure Democrat" on top of that.

At this point, I wouldn't vote for her even to vote against McCain. Democratic candidates shouldn't be rewarded for the kind of cravenness and incompetence she's displayed.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:19pm | #

Hussein committed political suicide on tape. Its just too perfect!

Democrats always screw the pooch.

gp | April 15, 2008, 4:22pm | #

"our economy is in the worst shape since the depression"

I guess you weren't around in 1980-1982.

Jeff | April 15, 2008, 4:22pm | #

Loved Jon Stewart's response to this - Gaffe-In

alan | April 15, 2008, 4:23pm | #

After 7 years of being duped and dragged through the mud by G. W. our economy is in the worst shape since the depression, we are hatted abroad and our family members serving in the military are facing extreme danger in Iraq. Of course I feel a little bitter and disillusioned about what government can and will do to make things better.

The President as CEO theory of governance resonates in the more unsophisticated quarters of the internet, media, and culture, but this is a libertarians oriented forum. Try to avoid embarrassing yourself with this sort of rhetoric. I don't lurk in Democratic forums as to avoid this sort of commoner thinking, but then again, maybe, I am an elitist.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:23pm | #

Where does the Democrat Party find these people anyway?

They always manage to nominate the most elitist, out of touch, unelectable, costal liberals they can find. Theyve even screwed up an otherwise perfect year by nominating this unelectable leftist bozo Hussein.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 4:23pm | #

What are you waiting for? Go get your gun . . .

Church is not until tomorrow around here.

alan | April 15, 2008, 4:26pm | #

but this is a libertarians oriented forum

Also avoid syntactical error that may occur to incomplete word changes, they can be as embarrassing as poorly derived logic.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 4:26pm | #

our economy is in the worst shape since the depression

What part of the Third World are you in and why are you blaming GWB?

John | April 15, 2008, 4:26pm | #

I would give anything to be able to sneak into an Obama press conference and ask him if NARAL and the Brady Campaign are clinging to guns and social issues out of bitterness over their bleak economic prospects.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:27pm | #

McCain has just won the election, and its not even May.

alan | April 15, 2008, 4:27pm | #

bleh, stupid auto-correction.

BakedPenguin | April 15, 2008, 4:30pm | #

Neil, you really need to meet Eric Dondero. He's your type of guy.

Church is not until tomorrow around here.

Then you're obviously not bitter enough. Start shooting until you become more bitter.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:31pm | #

Hey Baked Penguin, you really think McCain isn't our next President?

The Democrat Party is going to loose badly with this Hussein clown.

alan | April 15, 2008, 4:31pm | #

I come at this assuming that Obama will learn from this mistake, and it was a mistake no matter how you define it. However, his handling of it so far has been poor, either being oddly defensive, to attacking McCain for being 'out of touch'. A phrase that he should be avoiding, to say the least.

We'll see. It is possible that it is to early in the season for this matter to have a lasting effect, and it is equally plausible that it is so characteristic of Obama's mentality that he will constantly step in the verbal doo doo from now until November.

twistedmerkin | April 15, 2008, 4:32pm | #

But we can all agree that lonewacko is bitter, right?

Pro Libertate | April 15, 2008, 4:32pm | #

Neil,

I rather think both parties are suicidal, albeit in different ways. But your statement is false--remember the 90s? Clinton was an aberration, but he did win the White House twice. And the Democrats currently control Congress, which took some major ineptitude on the part of the GOP to happen.

Neither party has even come close to nominating their respective best candidates, even from the perspective of people okay with the status quo in DC. Let alone from the libertarian perspective.

I don't think the recent nonsense hands McCain a victory, but I do think he's going to win pretty easily. Obama and Clinton are both, overall, poor campaigners, and their sophomore status will be highlighted against McCain's much greater experience. He sucks, too, but he's probably going to appear less risky to most voters than the jokers on the other side. And with Clinton's willingness to go down to the bitter end fighting this out, plenty of poison will remain to severely weaken Obama's general election campaign.

R C Dean | April 15, 2008, 4:32pm | #

The controversy is simply hardening the biases that these voters held before it started.

In that case, it may well have cost Obama the PA primary and kept Hillary in the race by killing his momentum.

It may have done more than merely "hardened biases", by motivating some of those "bitter" voters to go ahead and vote against him.

our economy is in the worst shape since the depression

I can personally remember three recessions that were worse than the current slowdown which may or may not ever graduate to a full-on recession (two quarters of "negative growth").

Pro Libertate | April 15, 2008, 4:33pm | #

twistedmerkin,

Why do you hate the common man?

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:34pm | #

Pro L, Clinton won because 1) he ran as a centrist and 2) because of Ross Perot. If he had run as a leftist like Obama hed have lost so badly.

A lot of those "DemocratS" that were elected to Congress are Blue Dog Democrats, not the liberal leftist elites like Obama.

Boy, they're really going to hurt by having him on the top of the ticket!

shecky | April 15, 2008, 4:36pm | #

I missed the whole thing last weekend and just got around to reading what he said. My reaction: Big fucking deal. I'm inclined to go with SugarFree: this is some of the coldest, hardest truth I've heard from a politician. It seems a no brainer that when push comes to shove, folks revert to the old culture war and/or protectionist nonsense way too often.

Reading the reactions around the internet, it appears the folks most offended by these elitist remarks are the elites. Who knows how this plays in the long run?

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:36pm | #

The bottom line is this is a CONSERVATIVE country, and despite what liberal elitists like Joe and company think the 60s arent coming back.

B. Hussein isnt Kennedy, hes Dukakis.

Hes going to go down as one of the worst Democrat campaigns in history when the general rolls around.

John | April 15, 2008, 4:37pm | #

The Democrats are so screwed. Obama is becoming increasingly unelectable. But his mere presense makes Clinton unelectable. Lets say Clinton wins Pennsylvania by 15 points and wins Indiana big as well and the Dems get cold feet and go with Clinton. The black community would never forgive them. Black voters would stay home in November and Clinton would be lucky to win three states.

Creech | April 15, 2008, 4:38pm | #

If you live in Penna. and ever campaigned here
(and I've been with candidates who have) you will find embittered folks in towns like Shamokin and Hazleton and Altoona who were left behind by economic progress and marching to unreasonable union demands. They are bitter and some (women in particular) find solace in their religion that tells them "the meek will inherit the earth." Men, in particular, find fault with the big corporations or blacks up from the South or illegals who "stole our jarbs" as they gather at little bars and down another Yuengling. Obama thinks he can cure their bitterness with a heaping dose of government. Everybody loves Santa Claus, after all. Libertarians know their bitterness needs a different remedy. Offer it to many of these folks and you'll have a fist shaken in your face.

roversaurus | April 15, 2008, 4:38pm | #

Sorry, Neil, and other Republican shills,

I'll vote for Obama if he is on the ballot,
I'll vote for ANYONE who is not McCain -

Obama will most likely win the election.
This "gaffe" isn't going to kill him.
But the war and the economy WILL kill the
Republicans.

I've been a Libertarian who felt more comfortable with Republicans forever.
But you guys lost me. I'll hang out with the
Democrats now.

Did you guys ever even CONSIDER doing a cost
benefit analysis on your nation building
program? One of the costs was a losing
a generation of voters to the Democrats.

Brilliant move there.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 4:39pm | #

Shooting reduces my bitterness too much. Are you trying to turn me into some sort of coastal elitist or something?

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:40pm | #

Roversaurus tell me, how is Obama going to win places like Ohio and PA and Michigan in the GenerAL election after this idiotic statement?

Face it, he cant connect to working class heartland voetrs. He may when in Malibu but he wont win in Madison.

John | April 15, 2008, 4:41pm | #

"I missed the whole thing last weekend and just got around to reading what he said. My reaction: Big fucking deal. I'm inclined to go with SugarFree: this is some of the coldest, hardest truth I've heard from a politician. It seems a no brainer that when push comes to shove, folks revert to the old culture war and/or protectionist nonsense way too often."

That is a bunch of horsehit. People believed in those things more so 50 years ago when Pennsylvania was the arsenal of democracy. People started voting on social issues when liberals shoved things like forced busing, welfare, gun control, and the like down the country's throats in the 1960s and 70s. It is the Democrats who can't get over those issues. If the Democrats ran a pro life, pro gun evangelical for President, they would probably get a hell of a lot farther with their ecoomic platforms. But they refuse to do that.

Gilbert Martin | April 15, 2008, 4:43pm | #

"our economy is in the worst shape since the depression"

The people who think this are probably the same ones who think that Bill Clinton "created" a good economy in the 90's despite the fact that the economic expansion began before he took office in his first term and ended before he left it in his second.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:43pm | #

BTW, liberals, theres nothing "the matter" with Kansas.

How would you like it if some Conservative wrote a book called "Whats the matter with Manhattan?"

Condesending bull!!

Jeff | April 15, 2008, 4:44pm | #

When Fox news has trouble trying to find voters in Western Pennsylvania that think Obama's remarks are out of touch, you know there is some truth to his remarks.

And Neil, I know his middle name is Hussein, but by focusing on it, you show your biases and how juvenile your thinking is. My middle name is Howard, but I considered the kids in elementary school who tried to tease me by screaming my middle name juvenile at best.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 4:45pm | #

Busing! How could I forget that one! The Dems need to borrow a page from Richard Nixon and bring back busing!

But this time it won't be forced, it will be just like universal healthcare and income taxrs.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 4:47pm | #

taxes, silly fingers, that was supposed to be taxes

Pro Libertate | April 15, 2008, 4:47pm | #

I don't think the Democrats have done anything to win a "generation of voters." We're still in Iraq, and we likely will remain if Obama or Clinton win, despite the rhetoric. They'll be too concerned about the political repercussions associated with a rapid withdrawal.

Color me extraordinarily unimpressed with the new Congress. Nothing of substance has improved. And nothing will. That's not going to win any long-time loyalty from voters. Also, if one these awful candidates from the donkey side of the ticket manages to win, I suspect the tide will change again. It's always easier to be the minority party.

The GOP Congress sucked mightily, incidentally, and Bush is just pathetically bad.

Abdul | April 15, 2008, 4:47pm | #

How would you like it if some Conservative wrote a book called "Whats the matter with Manhattan?"

Who needs a book to explain that?

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:49pm | #

Pro L the Democrat Party is patheticalley bad they cant even manage to get their stuff straight in an electoin year where the party in power has a 28% approval rating, when people think the economy is bad (even though it isnt) and when a war is supposedly unpopular.

They STILL manage to loose. How pathetic, liberals must really be crying right now.

roversaurus | April 15, 2008, 4:50pm | #

Neil asks:
"Roversaurus tell me, how is Obama going to win places like Ohio and PA and Michigan in the GenerAL election after this idiotic statement?"

Several "hows":

1> No one is paying attention and those who are now will forget and those who are reminded will call it old news.

2> The perception of the economy will be that it sucks. Republicans will get the blame.

3> The perception of nation building will be that is sucks. Republicans will get the blame.

4> Obama is a more likeable human being that
more people will want to hang around.
The more likeable candidate usually wins.

5> McCain will not produce enthusiasm in his base.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:51pm | #

LOL roversaurus, people think McCain is a maverick they wont blame "Republicans" they will blame the DEMOCRAT CONGRESS and President Bush (who isnt running!)

They wont identify the maverick straight-talker with Bush.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 4:52pm | #

If PA really is a bunch of stupid, Church going, gun totin' racist rednecks like SugarFree implies, then my question of killer bees and the ozone hole being ignored during this part of the campaign has been answered.

alan | April 15, 2008, 4:52pm | #

I don't think the Democrats have done anything to win a "generation of voters." We're still in Iraq, and we likely will remain if Obama or Clinton win, despite the rhetoric. They'll be too concerned about the political repercussions associated with a rapid withdrawal.

Color me extraordinarily unimpressed with the new Congress. Nothing of substance has improved. And nothing will. That's not going to win any long-time loyalty from voters. Also, if one these awful candidates from the donkey side of the ticket manages to win, I suspect the tide will change again. It's always easier to be the minority party.

The GOP Congress sucked mightily, incidentally, and Bush is just pathetically bad.

No comment. I just thought it worth repeating.

John | April 15, 2008, 4:52pm | #

"4> Obama is a more likeable human being that
more people will want to hang around.
The more likeable candidate usually wins."

I think Obama's likability has taken a serious hit in the last few weeks. Ultimately, Obama's comments go against the idea of social equity, which is a hell of a lot more important in this country than monitary equity.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:53pm | #

LOL Montag you add wit and wisdom to every thread!

Fluffy | April 15, 2008, 4:54pm | #

People believed in those things more so 50 years ago when Pennsylvania was the arsenal of democracy.

John, come on.

I would bet that the % of charismatic envangelical Christians in Pennsylvania, Michigan, the northern counties of Ohio, and Wisconsin approached 0 when they were the "arsenal of democracy".

I'm sure you would have had very high numbers for religious participation, but the religious experience of the middle and upper classes in the northeast and midwest from 1940-1980 just can't be usefully compared to the modern evangelical experience.

Modern evangelicals can much, much more be said to be "clinging" to their religion than your average tepid Christian did in the past.

And whether you like it or not, over the Judeo-Christian world as a whole, religious fervor has tended to vary inversely with economic success. The situation in the US post-1980 is anomalous and right now not very easily explained. I personally tend to think that specific regional factors in the US created a situation which is not sustainable, and that the evangelical movement will burn out again in a generation or two, returning us to the proper social progression where religious belief slowly attenuates.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 4:54pm | #

Neil, what did I tell you about the "m" word and McCain?

Are you some sort of career civilian or something?

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:55pm | #

I'm an engineer Montag.

Nelson Muntz | April 15, 2008, 4:56pm | #

Howard? Ha HA!

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 4:57pm | #

John,

I think Obama's likability has taken a serious hit in the last few weeks. Ultimately, Obama's comments go against the idea of social equity, which is a hell of a lot more important in this country than monitary equity.

Of course he is adorable! Ask anybody in San Francicso, Miami or Manhattan! I betcha he is considered adorable in certain parts of Boston too.

John | April 15, 2008, 4:58pm | #

"I would bet that the % of charismatic envangelical Christians in Pennsylvania, Michigan, the northern counties of Ohio, and Wisconsin approached 0 when they were the "arsenal of democracy"."


Fluffy are you insane? Do you realize how incredibly liberal our society is today versus 50 years ago? People weren't evangelicals back then because they didn't need to be. The mainline churches preached things that they don't today. It was illegal, as in go to prison and a lot of people did, to be gay in most of this country in the 1950s. Forget gay marriage, you went to the bar hotel if you were gay. Dirty movies were illegal. Strip clubs were illegal. It was impossible to get a divorce without the consent of both parties in most states. This country as a whole was more culturally conservative in 1950 than the biggest evangelicals are today. Jesus fluffy you are normally not that stupid. Get back on your meds or something.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 4:59pm | #

Neil,

Then stick to driving trains and stop misusing that maverick term.

roversaurus | April 15, 2008, 5:02pm | #

The Democrats haven't "won a generation".

I said the Republicans LOST a generation.

The generation lost is folks from 18 to hmmm 27..
The ones who grew up with Bush.

Reagan won over a generation for the Republicans when he was President.

alan | April 15, 2008, 5:02pm | #

Miami? Not exactly a city that attracts snobs IMO.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 5:03pm | #

LOL ok sure thing Guy btw love your blog!!

Legate Damar | April 15, 2008, 5:04pm | #

Is anyone else impressed by how poorly Clinton has managed to parlay this mistake into actualy gains? I'm not sure that one shot of whisky and a lot of tattling ("Did you hear what Obama said? Why, no, I'm not smiling about it") makes the offended blue-collar Democrat feel any better about her.

I half expected her to put on one of those John Edwards-inspired flannel shirts and talk about how she always takes Bill to Wendy's on the anniversary of his impeachment.

John | April 15, 2008, 5:04pm | #

"The generation lost is folks from 18 to hmmm 27..
The ones who grew up with Bush."


The Republicans need not worry. Eventually they will move out of their parents basements, have to get jobs and start paying taxes and the Democrats won't look so attractive anymore.

Legate Damar | April 15, 2008, 5:04pm | #

"actual" gains. Stoopid intertubes.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 5:05pm | #

Lagate dont worry McCain will do very well with these remarks as will "swiftobat" 527s.

The election was decided in that room in San Fran.

Fluffy | April 15, 2008, 5:06pm | #

John,

The country was definitely much more culturally conservative in the 1950's than it is now.

I would submit, however, that this was not a result of passionate religious belief.

I think that the analysis of American religious life that Billy Graham put forth when he essentially invented the modern evangelical revival was accurate. America's conservative social mores were just that: social. Religious belief [in the sense of having passionate attachments to the particulars of the religious experience] was enervated and atrophying. It was not, in general, considered a sign of intellectual seriousness or acumen to be extraordinarily religious. Being "born again" was a bit odd, and would have been extremely odd outside of the south and west.

If you think Michigan factory workers in the 60's were buying their kids Jesus armor pajamas, you are nuts.

roversaurus | April 15, 2008, 5:06pm | #

Neil said:
"LOL roversaurus, people think McCain is a maverick they wont blame "Republicans" they will blame the DEMOCRAT CONGRESS and President Bush (who isnt running!)

They wont identify the maverick straight-talker with Bush."

You official fall in to the kook category.
Unless I learn that you are paid to say such
drivel at which point you can upgrade to slightly slimy. But hey everyone's got to pay
the bills some how.

Fluffy | April 15, 2008, 5:10pm | #

By the way, John -

I'm sure there were plenty of atheists in 1900 who thought that women shouldn't vote, and that homosexuals should be jailed, and that blacks were inferior, and that alcohol should be banned, etc.

Those social mores don't line up 1-to-1 with religious fervor. They tend to do so now, but that's because the evangelical movement was a movement against both religious apathy and social liberalization.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 5:10pm | #

Yeah roversaurus, people out here in the heartland sure are "kooks". These "kooks" are going to elect John McCain President though!

Now go cry some more in your Chardonnay about how your golden boy B. Hussein has committed political suicide and screwed your chances of a victory.

John | April 15, 2008, 5:11pm | #

"If you think Michigan factory workers in the 60's were buying their kids Jesus armor pajamas, you are nuts."

That is a good point. But I think that the rise of the evangelicals is the result of two things. First, the total sellout of mainline Prostestant Churches to social liberalism drove a lot of people away from them. Yeah, those factory workers in the 1960s were not doing kooky evangelical stuff, but they still went to church most of them and had pretty traditional views about religion. Second, is that a lot of evangelicals are from the baby boom. The evangelicals are just the weird counter to the new age movement. The older generation never really was evangelicals. It was their kids. A lot of the boomers in the 60s who didn't go in one ditch of taking acid and meditating with the maharishi went in the other ditch and became evangelicals. I don't think economics had anything to do with that. It was truly a social phenomenon driven by the sellout of the Protestant churches and the weird vibe of the baby boom generation.

alan | April 15, 2008, 5:12pm | #

The election was decided in that room in San Fran.

Why do you believe the matter to be irreversible?

What does polling on the matter reveal? Personally, I think polling reveals little, and wont until there is time for it to sink in. Many people still have not heard about it, and so how it is gauged in November I don't think you can conclude 'is a done deal.'

shrike | April 15, 2008, 5:13pm | #

This little episode will be erased by a long, hot summer in Iraq with the US body count hitting 5000, one million foreclosures, and a series of debates where McCain will look hopelessly lost.

But the GOP/redneck vote is important and these God/Guns/Gays idiots were never going to vote for Obama anyway - but the endless assault on Obama by unsavory rednecks will eventually tire on the electorate and work to his advantage.

Keep it up, Neil!

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 5:14pm | #

Perhaps Sen. Obama can connect with the PA folks by talking about UFOs? The tabloids talk about them in PA all the time and some were recently spotted in Chicago. What a connection! Even Jimmy Carter believes in extraterrestrials. I suggest the good Senator board a plane right now and join Pres. Carter on that Hamas trip to get some talking points. might help him in Miami with the Jewish ethnic vote.

Even that Cafferty guy on CNN was comparing the people in rural PA to people taking up guns in the Middle-East, so this is a big win all the way around.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 5:15pm | #

Shirke Obama needed the "Reagan DemocratS" and they sure as hell arent going to vote for him after this!

But dont worry theres more coming on Hussein (he was in the million man march with Farakkhan, that should be breaking this summer JUST before the convention!)

Good-bye Jewish vote.

Lurker Kurt | April 15, 2008, 5:16pm | #

Hence, joe's an idiot

Now, now.

No need for name calling and insults. Especially when Joe hasn't even commented yet.

Joe may be a shill for Big Leftism, but he is honest about his shilling and is usually polite to those of us on the right (until someone attacks him).

Let's act like adults, please.

alan | April 15, 2008, 5:17pm | #

roversaurus | April 15, 2008, 5:06pm | #
Neil said:
"LOL roversaurus, people think McCain is a maverick they wont blame "Republicans" they will blame the DEMOCRAT CONGRESS and President Bush (who isnt running!)

They wont identify the maverick straight-talker with Bush."

You official fall in to the kook category.
Unless I learn that you are paid to say such
drivel at which point you can upgrade to slightly slimy. But hey everyone's got to pay
the bills some how.

Neil's opinion of McCain in that statement reflects the mainstream media in its collective assessment of McCain:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/14/AR2008041402633_pf.html

So, that attempt at gate keeping there wrings hallow.

Note, there is no way in hell I am voting for McCain in November. I am only being objective here.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 5:17pm | #

shrike,

Rednecks are people too. Why must you be so devisive?

Fluffy | April 15, 2008, 5:19pm | #

A lot of the boomers in the 60s who didn't go in one ditch of taking acid and meditating with the maharishi went in the other ditch and became evangelicals.

I usually give you a hard time, but I have to say this insight really strikes me as something I hadn't thought of before and will have to think about. I never looked at it that way, but talking about evangelicalism as being the religious equivalent of going to Woodstock is a really interesting way to look at it.

Lurker Kurt | April 15, 2008, 5:19pm | #

Where does the Democrat Party find these people anyway?

They always manage to nominate the most elitist, out of touch, unelectable, costal liberals they can find.

Could it be money?

Aren't the richest Democrats coastal elites??

Would they most likely be willing to donate to candidates who hold similar views???

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 5:22pm | #

Is there a season for coastal elites? Do I need a permit?

Would not want to accidentally bag a cosmotarian, so will need to know how to distinguish them frome eich other.

Other Matt | April 15, 2008, 5:23pm | #

Joe may be a shill for Big Leftism, but he is honest about his shilling and is usually polite to those of us on the right (until someone attacks him).

I'm not on the right, and he's still an idiot. I'm not attacking him, I'm making a statement of fact. If you look at his arguments, they don't hold logical continuity across time, so either he's a troll or an idiot, and I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Lagate dont worry McCain will do very well with these remarks as will "swiftobat" 527s.

Exactly, it won't hurt him in the primary. If he makes it to the general election, it will hurt badly.

The election was decided in that room in San Fran.

That might be an overstatment, though, it remains to be seen.

Pro Libertate | April 15, 2008, 5:23pm | #

roversaurus,

I think that both parties are on incredibly shaky ground with the so-called "middle", which is really just people who (1) aren't dumb enough to buy either party's rhetorical nonsense, (2) can't tell a practical difference between the parties, (3) find things they like about each party's platforms, and/or (4) are really crazed libertarian fanatics. Okay, the last one is a small number. In any event, that group is growing larger, and the current political process is not generating the party loyalty it once did.

Someday, maybe people will stop being stupid about politics and actually vote on issues that matter or that are attributable to the politicians in power. The war can be dumped in the lap of this administration, clearly. The economy can't--what possible effect has Bush had on the economy? Tax cuts? Even the war? Please. I also don't care that much about the personalities of those running, or even what they think of us common folk. However, without an adequate resume, which should be a minimum qualification for the presidency (so we can evaluate the candidate's actions, rather than his/her words), we have little else to judge but rhetoric and personality.

On the other side, we have an experienced nut. Poor America, reduced to four more years of executive folly, either way we jump.

alan | April 15, 2008, 5:26pm | #

You can easily spot me as they guy who has to spike all of his drinks with Ever Clear to get a decent buzz from them. A coastal elite would never do that! However, I'm paleo from the neck up, Cosmo from the waist down.

alan | April 15, 2008, 5:30pm | #

However, without an adequate resume, which should be a minimum qualification for the presidency (so we can evaluate the candidate's actions, rather than his/her words), we have little else to judge but rhetoric and personality.

Exactly. What the hell is a community organizer? I can probably get away with putting that on my resume too, but it would be the least interesting item.

Gilbert Martin | April 15, 2008, 5:33pm | #

"Is there a season for coastal elites? Do I need a permit?

Would not want to accidentally bag a cosmotarian, so will need to know how to distinguish them frome eich other."

The former have limper wrists than the latter.

Jim Bob | April 15, 2008, 5:44pm | #

Village Girl: "Sir? Sir? Sir, the horse is dead. She is dead. Please, sir, don't beat her any more. I beg you, sir!"

Horse Beater: "Dead? DEAD? This horse isn't dead! (kicks horse) Horses do not die, I tell you! They are immortal! (beats horse carcass, savagely, with a metal baseball bat).

Village Girl: "But sir! The horse, it is dead, clearly dead. It feels no pain, sir; it cannot suffer this punishment because it feels nothing..."

Horse Beater: "THEY NEVER DIE!" (flogs the corpse with an extension cord. and again. and again.)

atrevete | April 15, 2008, 5:50pm | #

"Yeah roversaurus, people out here in the heartland sure are "kooks". These "kooks" are going to elect John McCain President though!"

Actually the US demographics have changed dramatically in the past 30 years or so. "Small town" America is no longer the majority - 70% of the populace now live in urban areas of one million or more. In 1970, it was less than 30% who lived in large urban centers. Those "chardonnay sippers" are now the majority.

Mad Max | April 15, 2008, 5:52pm | #

"I personally tend to think that specific regional factors in the US created a situation which is not sustainable, and that the evangelical movement will burn out again in a generation or two, returning us to the proper social progression where religious belief slowly attenuates."

Now, now, don't be so bitter.

the great prognosticator | April 15, 2008, 5:53pm | #

Obama will either lose at the convention or lose in the general election. Either way, McCain is our next president.

If the Democrats learn from their mistakes, which would be a first, they'll nominate Jim Webb in 2012.

matt | April 15, 2008, 5:55pm | #

Exactly. What the hell is a community organizer? I can probably get away with putting that on my resume too, but it would be the least interesting item.

Community organizers who aren't marxists are called "volunteers", and they do it for free, oddly enough.

Hat Pines | April 15, 2008, 5:58pm | #

Too bad the Dems didnt nominate someone Bill Richardson or Evan Bayh or Tom Vilsack.

atrevete | April 15, 2008, 6:02pm | #

Small town America is no longer the majority. In 1970, less than 30% of people lived in urban areas of a million or more, now over 70% do. So yes, the "chardonay sippers" are now the majority.

Mad Max | April 15, 2008, 6:03pm | #

Incidentally, the Republicans can stop with their fake-ass populism. Pretending that you drink Bud and watch NASCAR doesn't make you a salt-of-the-earth Man of the People.

The Republican operatives who yammer and whine on TV should come out of the closet and admit that they spend more time behind a computer keyboard than behind the wheel of a tractor; that they couldn't change, or even recognize, a carburetor; that the only time they interact with a member of the working class is when they send back the beef bourginone because it's undercooked, and that the closest they came to serving in uniform was when they put on that Sailor Moon costume for the Halloween party.

atrevete | April 15, 2008, 6:04pm | #

(Sorry for the double post)

Neil | April 15, 2008, 6:07pm | #

LOL I'm not talking about just rural areas but also the suburbs and smaller all-American cities like Kansas City and Orlando.


They elected Bush and theyll elect McCain.

Pro Libertate | April 15, 2008, 6:09pm | #

Sigh. Identity politics. Please step into the appropriate identity box for labeling and processing. What? You claim to be from the South and to not be a racist? Sorry, that's not allowed. Please move or change your views.

What? You're a conservative in the Northeast? Please report to Disintegration Chamber Number 3.

I daresay each of us has more varied opinions than the political parties, the government, or the media give us credit for.

Kolohe | April 15, 2008, 6:13pm | #

"Face it, he [obama] cant connect to working class heartland voetrs. He may when in Malibu but he wont win in Madison."

Somebody should check on Michael Barone to ensure he doesn't need a defiberlator.

Neil, you ever hear of LaFollette (sp?)?

TallDave | April 15, 2008, 6:14pm | #

Obama lost a grand total of one point over the week

Unless you count that poll where he lost 20, or the other in which he lost 4.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 6:16pm | #

LOL kolohe you have to go back like 100 years to find a socialist from the Heartland?

Obama may win San Fracisco, but he wont win Spokane.

joshua corning | April 15, 2008, 6:32pm | #

"our economy is in the worst shape since the depression"

I guess you weren't around in 1980-1982.

Hell he wasn't around in 2000-2002.

Mad Max | April 15, 2008, 6:32pm | #

I'm a populist Republican, and I'm OK
I post snotty comments in blogs all day
I'm one of the regular folks, don't you see
I put barbecue sauce on my brie
It doesn't matter whether I can spell
So long as I start each sentence with "LOL."
I'm close to the people, I can feel their pulses
I support regular Americans like those in Tulsa
All I know is I support McCain
My ideas are so simple I don't need a brain

ChicagoTom | April 15, 2008, 6:32pm | #

the great prognosticator | April 15, 2008, 5:53pm | #
...

If the Democrats learn from their mistakes, which would be a first, they'll nominate Jim Webb in 2012.

The politics of the Karl Rove era were designed to distract and divide the very people who would ordinarily be rebelling against the deterioration of their way of life. Working Americans have been repeatedly seduced at the polls by emotional issues such as the predictable mantra of "God, guns, gays, abortion and the flag" while their way of life shifted ineluctably beneath their feet.

This "elitism" comes from Jim Webb's Op/ED here

I guess it's only elitist if you come from a solid Democratic state?

joshua corning | April 15, 2008, 6:34pm | #

LOL kolohe you have to go back like 100 years to find a socialist from the Heartland?

Obama may win San Fracisco, but he wont win Spokane.

Huh? Spokane is like 6 hours from the beach.

P Brooks | April 15, 2008, 6:34pm | #

Obama may win San Fracisco, but he wont win Spokane.

You must not be from around here. The "Inland Northwest" is crawling with people who fit more comfortably in the Chardonnay-sipping-crypto-socialist-empath box than the old-timey-he-man-logger-who-lost-his-job-to-the-spotted-owl box. The sort of people who will vote for Obama because he promised to save those fabulously picturesque loggers drinking Rainier down at that quaint little faux-dive by the river.

Famous Mortimer | April 15, 2008, 6:46pm | #

Yes, but they are bitter.

Kolohe | April 15, 2008, 6:50pm | #

And I guess I should have spelled it out.

Putting aside the fact the fact that religious revivalism and 'good heartland christian values' were part and parcel with the original progressive movement of the late 19th/early 20th c - of which we're starting to experience a comeback with 'the christian left'- Madison, WI itself is one of the most politically liberal populations in the US today.

Kolohe | April 15, 2008, 6:51pm | #

But you are right in that Obama will not win Spokane

Pug | April 15, 2008, 6:52pm | #

I'd rather win San Francisco than Spokane any day. He sure as hell doesn't need Spokane because he will win Seattle.

The votes are in the big cities and the 'burbs, not back water Pennsylvania used-to-be steel towns.

If Obama is such a bad candidate doesn't it stand to reason that both McCain and Clinton would be killing him in the polls? They aren't.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 7:05pm | #

Just wait Pug.

Drip,drip, drip, drip, his polls numbers will slowly fall and fall and fall.

Maybe not in Washington, but they will in Wyoming.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 7:10pm | #

Ah ha!

If Neil was not a big faker he would have known the whole maverick thing was a test! The word is MUSTANG!

There everybody, I have solved the puzzle.

Gilbert Martin,

Thank you for the IFF info. Now I need to refine it so I don't bag any Air Force officers, or Quartermaster Officers.

Just got back from dinner. Had a fine merlot with my cheeseburger, medium at Mackey's.

Um, that last part isn't turning me into an elitist is it? I mean, I am still kinda bitter.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 7:11pm | #

Senator Obama needs to cosey up with Bill Maher to shrug off thar elitist stuff and maybe score some points with Catholics.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 7:13pm | #

Montag, you'll always be a red-blooded heartland American to me. And your blog is a window into what we all think, truly on the level of Sean Hannity.

Mad Max | April 15, 2008, 7:19pm | #

"Senator Obama needs to cosey up with Bill Maher to shrug off thar elitist stuff and maybe score some points with Catholics."

Well, which is it? Cosy up to Bill Maher, or score points with Catholics?

http://www.catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1418

joshua corning | April 15, 2008, 7:21pm | #

Seriously when the fuck did Spokane become the Heartland of America?!?!

VM | April 15, 2008, 7:21pm | #

Montag, you'll always be a red-blooded heartland American to me. And your blog is a window into what we all think, truly on the level of Sean Hannity.

threadwinner!

Apaulogist | April 15, 2008, 7:24pm | #

TNR un-spins? That's a switch.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 7:24pm | #

Confusing me with an FDR worshiping SocialCon is now way to score any points.

Guy Montag | April 15, 2008, 7:26pm | #

and "no way to" also

Neil | April 15, 2008, 7:26pm | #

Not all of his political views, of course, but in your STYLE!

You combine the confrantation style of Bill O'Reiley with the debating skills of Sean Hannity, with the down-home heartland wisdom of Joe Scarborough thrown in for good measure.

Handsome Dan | April 15, 2008, 7:30pm | #

Face it, he cant connect to working class heartland voetrs. He may when in Malibu but he wont win in Madison

Neil you appear to know as much about the "heartland" as you do about flying the space shuttle. If McCain wins Madison, I will tear my own dick off with my bare hands and send it to you in the mail.

Handsome Dan | April 15, 2008, 7:31pm | #

Or eat my hat. Or something.

joshua corning | April 15, 2008, 7:31pm | #

Joe may be a shill for Big Leftism, but he is honest about his shilling and is usually polite to those of us on the right (until someone attacks him).

Bullshit and Bullshit.

Note: I do not have a problem with Joe being impolite regardless if he is provoked or not. But to say he is polite until someone attacks him truly is pure bullshit.

hale | April 15, 2008, 7:41pm | #

I thought it had been pretty firmly established that Neil is sort of Juanita II.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 7:42pm | #

My point still stands that at the end of the day, theres a big country between Cambridge and Berkely (its called "The United States of America") and its not going to vote for B. Hussein Obama, no matter how much the bicostal media elites think that as they flyover us from New York to the Left Coast.

zoltan | April 15, 2008, 8:36pm | #

Why do people still engage Neil in conversation? He doesn't believe anything he says. Been to FreedomSwatch? It's the poor man's political version of LandOverBaptist.com.

Apaulogist | April 15, 2008, 8:38pm | #

There are compelling arguments to be made that few will vote for ANY of the three stooges, but BHO is the only nonneocon in contention.

Kolohe | April 15, 2008, 8:42pm | #

Been to FreedomSwatch? It's the poor man's political version of LandOverBaptist.com.

I had heard it was legit and an attempt to create a 'moveon.org' of the right.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 8:50pm | #

FreedomsWatch.org is the vanguard of the Conservative movement, and will be in the forefront of defeating B. Hussein Obama and his liberal Democrat agenda in the fall.

zoltan | April 15, 2008, 8:59pm | #

Kolohe:

Technically, it is legit, it just looks like a poorly designed crackpot site to me. The first few times I visited I thought it was fake due to the lack of quality. Check out the Core Values in the About section. It's hilarious.

roversaurus | April 15, 2008, 8:59pm | #

Neal,

You're delusional.

The only value you are adding for your side
is emotional. You are only bucking up the courage
of those who already believe.

And probably dissuading others who lean your
way because your statements are so divorced
from reality that they will be embarrassed.

J sub D | April 15, 2008, 9:01pm | #

After 7 years of being duped and dragged through the mud by G. W. our economy is in the worst shape since the depression,

I was born 20 years after the great depression. I have heard "the worst economy since the depression" more times that I can fucking count. Come up with something new for chrissakes! I don't need to hear McGovern, Carter, Reagan campaign slogans recycled.

Please! America is tired of it.

Apaulogist | April 15, 2008, 9:09pm | #

The best thing about being a pessimist is that you are never disappointed, only pleasantly surprised.

Core Issue of FreedomsWatch | April 15, 2008, 9:40pm | #

4. Preventing the degeneration of our society by stopping the legalization of controlled substances.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 9:45pm | #

Whats wrong with that??

I believe people who use mind-altering substances display a gross weakness of character, and that we have enough problems with alcohol for more and more psychatropic substances to be legalized.

I guess you want cocaine sold at 7-11??

A Pre-emptive Joe | April 15, 2008, 9:46pm | #

It won't hurt in the primary, idiots like joe won't be swayed if he was a child molesting satan worshipper who shipped off four thousand whites to a gas chamber.

Hey! I resent that. More than three thousand and I might get a bit peeved.

J sub D | April 15, 2008, 9:52pm | #

Neil | April 15, 2008, 4:27pm | #

McCain has just won the election, and its not even May.

Does that mean you will go away forever?

Jim Bob | April 15, 2008, 9:58pm | #

I guess you want cocaine sold at 7-11?

I'm chill with that, actually.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 10:04pm | #

Jim Bob you DO know the Islamofascists are behind much of the drug trade??

In the 1880s Britain undermined China by selling them opium and destroying their society through drugs.

Now the Islamofascists want to do the same to us!!

vanya | April 15, 2008, 10:17pm | #

Here is what people seem to be missing. Democrats who live in small towns for the most part agree with what Obama said. Most small town Democrats do look down on their Republican neighbors - the Democrats in small towns tend to be teachers, social workers, government employees hippie types, or educated professionals. They are usually better educated than their Republican neighbors, are more cosmopolitan and, yeah, they do look down on the guns and Jesus crowd. Obama just forgot to throw in ATVs and snow mobiles, a real pet peeve of the small town Democrats I know. Small town liberals usually consider small town conservatives either ignorant, deluded or materialistic boors (if the conservatives are rich). I come from a long line of small town New Hampshire liberals - I think I know what I'm talking about. Obama may have hurt himself with the PA union vote, but that was in the bag for Hilary anyway. Unless Hilary is running for the Republican nomination she's just shooting herself in the foot with her ridiculous over the top response - or,more likely, she's given up and is really trying to help McCain win the general. I don't see this "controversy" helping Hilary at all. Whether it helps McCain remains to be seen - November is still 7 months and God knows how many ginned up fake media scandals away.

Wu | April 15, 2008, 10:20pm | #

Europe sold China opium? Just like Peking sold coal to Newcastle?

R C Dean | April 15, 2008, 10:36pm | #

Jim Bob you DO know the Islamofascists are behind much of the drug trade??

Neil, you do know that criminal syndicates like Islamofascist gangs are involved in any trade primarily because it is a black market, due to legal prohibitions?

IOW, if Islamofascists are peddling drugs, its because drug war fascists have outlawed them.

R C Dean | April 15, 2008, 10:37pm | #

I guess you want cocaine sold at 7-11?

Like Everclear? Sure, why not.

Daniel Reeves | April 15, 2008, 10:40pm | #

I guess you want cocaine sold at 7-11??

That'd be neat.

P Brooks | April 15, 2008, 10:44pm | #

I guess you want cocaine sold at 7-11??

fuckin-A right, buddy

Neil | April 15, 2008, 10:45pm | #

RC Dean theyre not doing it only for financial gain but also to undermine our youths will to fight.

G.I. Joe isnt going to want to fight Iranians if hes tripping on acid.

Kolohe | April 15, 2008, 11:02pm | #

G.I. Joe isnt going to want to fight Iranians if hes tripping on acid.


Neil, I generally loath the chickenhawk arguement, but if you are really you, please sign up.

It doesn't even have to be the 'green' services, the 'blue' ones will do fine.

Seriously, look hier

If you have an engineering degree from an acredited institution, and are under 31, uncle sam will put $15,000 (minus taxes, of course - can't forget the spirit of the day) in your pocket in the next 60 days. And then, aside from some angry dudes yelling at you for about 13 weeks, you spend most of the next year and a half in more or less a college environment. And unlike college where you're paying at least $1000/ mo, you'll get *paid* over $3000 a month. Dude, it's win-win.

Neil | April 15, 2008, 11:05pm | #

Sorry, Kolohe, but Im needed at the homefront so our boys arent stabbed-in-the-back by defeatist civillian politicians at the very moment they are on the verge of victory.

Kolohe | April 15, 2008, 11:07pm | #

neil, as you are fond of saying, lol.

BakedPenguin | April 15, 2008, 11:29pm | #

Hey Baked Penguin, you really think McCain isn't our next President?

It's not so much that I don't think he'll be the next president as I don't give a shit either way, since whoever becomes the next president will be a statist asshole. I plan on "throwing my vote away" on whatever clown the Libertarians nominate.

Having said that, I'd vote for Obama before I'd vote for that crappy Teddy Roosevelt impersonator you seem have a man-crush on.

BakedPenguin | April 15, 2008, 11:31pm | #

As a matter of fact, if Obama was for putting cocaine in Seven-Elevens, then I'd vote for him ahead of the libertarian.

We are all elitists now | April 15, 2008, 11:58pm | #

We KNOW Obama's remarks aren't going to play well in Wyoming. But just how many electoral votes do they get? So it'