Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Mon 03/17/2008 View Sun 03/16/2008 View Sat 03/15/2008 View Fri 03/14/2008 View Thu 03/13/2008 View Wed 03/12/2008 View Tue 03/11/2008
1
2008-03-17 Home Front: Politix
Gotcha, Obama!
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Mike 2008-03-17 08:24|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [11130 views ]  Top

#1 Obama's campaign says he didn't attend Wright's church on the day (July 22, 2007)

Betcha Obama will claim to not attending this sermon either. But he damn well heard about it afterwards.

Sept. 16, 2001: Blaming the United States for the New York and Washington DC massacres only 5 days old.

“We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye,” Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.

“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” he told his congregation.

Obama's had 6 1/2 years to voice how much of a racist shit his pastor, his spiritual and moral adviser, really is.
Posted by ed 2008-03-17 09:18||   2008-03-17 09:18|| Front Page Top

#2 I saw a survey the other day that put Obama: Clinton at 43%:42%, with McCain at 48%. I do not remember whether that was for Democratic voters or overall, and whether it was for Pennsylvania or the nation. Sorry. Still, the response of the Democratic superdelegates to the unclear will of the people will be quite interesting -- Mr. Soros is getting quite a lot of bang for the bucks he spread amongst all three finalists... although I think he will have to spend more, now.
Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife  2008-03-17 09:29||   2008-03-17 09:29|| Front Page Top

#3 This fellows bold presidential aspirations aside, he's a currently serving "United States Senator." I certainly hope Americans are taking a long hard look at what political districting has brought to us.
Posted by Besoeker 2008-03-17 09:29||   2008-03-17 09:29|| Front Page Top

#4 As close as Obama and Wright were for two years, common sense says that Obama didn't need to sit in the pew to know what Wright thought of America.

With Mrs. Obama also saying the same thing as Wright, "For the first time, I am beginning to believe in America" either Obama is deaf or is lieing when the two people he has been closely associated with, the wife and the "pastor" clearly use hate speech in regards to this country.
Posted by Punky Threang1071 2008-03-17 10:27||   2008-03-17 10:27|| Front Page Top

#5 *correction* two should read twenty
Posted by Punky Threang1071 2008-03-17 10:28||   2008-03-17 10:28|| Front Page Top

#6 The more the mainstream people in the US find out about Obama, the more he is gonna sink like a rock in the polls. Rev. Wright is a millstone around his neck and Obama's wife is not much better. Both will drag him down to defeat either in the primary or the general election.
Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader  2008-03-17 10:48||   2008-03-17 10:48|| Front Page Top

#7 Political districting? Dude, he's a US Senator. Their districts are the entire state. Unless you're speculating that Illinois would vote differently if some Indiana farmland had been incorporated back when they were dividing up the Old NorthWest.

Now, if you want to blame this on the 17th Amendment, I could get behind that. The Senate hasn't been the same since that Progressive brainfart.
Posted by Mitch H.">Mitch H.  2008-03-17 11:02|| http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/]">[http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/]  2008-03-17 11:02|| Front Page Top

#8 Duuuuhhhh... yep Mitch, I'm stuck on stupid. My bad. But the Illinois-Indiana program you've suggested sounds pretty good!!
Posted by Besoeker 2008-03-17 11:12||   2008-03-17 11:12|| Front Page Top

#9 Obama has surrounded himself with those who don't care much for America. His mother, the hippie anthropologist, was certainly no fan of the good ol' USA. OHB was raised on this perspective. His wife certainly feels this way. His minister clearly does. So the simple question for voters is, do you really want someone to be president who doesn't like the country that you grew up in? Compare that to McCain. Should be like shooting fish in a barrel.
Posted by Remoteman 2008-03-17 15:21||   2008-03-17 15:21|| Front Page Top

#10 So, for whom should I vote? Obama or Clinton?
Posted by Pennsylvania Farmer 2008-03-17 15:25||   2008-03-17 15:25|| Front Page Top

#11 They hate the same country that has made them rich beyond our wildest dreams
Posted by bigjim-ky 2008-03-17 15:31||   2008-03-17 15:31|| Front Page Top

#12 So who is racially dividing America? The Republicans who were fairly pro Obama despite his liberal policies because he seemed honest and straight forward? The Democrats who voted en mass for Obama up until his his wife and preachers comments became public knowledge? Or the blacks who voted for Obama because of his color, or the preacher who promoted hate and bile to his black congregation.

Yes American needs to discuss our racial issues but I don't think many are going to appreciate the discussion. Racism appears to be alive and well in the black community more than anywhere else.

Posted by rjschwarz 2008-03-17 15:46||   2008-03-17 15:46|| Front Page Top

#13 I think that a lot of the problem has to do with the fact that the self-appointed "leaders" of the black community are, by and large, people who make their living off of racial tension. (Yeah, Sharpton, I'm talkin' 'bout YOU! And you, Jackson! Yougottaproblemwitdat?) It's in their immediate personal financial interest to keep the pot boiling.
Posted by Mike 2008-03-17 16:38||   2008-03-17 16:38|| Front Page Top

#14 shows how much the rev knows about histry. we safved millions of japanese and american lives by nuking them instead of invading. he seems too talk out his ass alot doesn't he
Posted by sinse 2008-03-17 16:59||   2008-03-17 16:59|| Front Page Top

#15 Exactly, sinse. For those of you who are interested, I recommend the book "Downfall" by Richard B. Frank. It tells the story of the end of the Japanese empire, the preparations they were making for the invasion, and American plans for further bombing if the nukes didn't work.
In short, there would have been millions of civilian casualties in an invasion. Also, the Americans were getting ready to bomb the railroads and bridges, which would have stopped food from getting to the cities, which would have caused mass starvation. Yes, the hundreds of thousands of American military casualties would have been hard to deal with. However, we would have had millions of non-combatant deaths on our national conscience as well.
As it was, Japan was near starvation when the war ended. General MacArthur insisted that we send massive food aid. Many Americans had the attitude, "Let the Jap bastards starve. They started it." MacArthur's reply was "We're better than that."
So, yes, many thousands were killed by the atomic bombs. (We probably killed more overall in the firebombing of Tokyo and other cities.) However, many, many more would have died if there had been an invasion.
Posted by Rambler in California">Rambler in California  2008-03-17 17:26||   2008-03-17 17:26|| Front Page Top

#16 Rambler,

You may be interested in this review of Retribution by Max Hastings that chronicles the last year of the War in the Pacific.

In early 1945, the U.S. Navy tightened its noose around Japan, shutting off the shipping so essential to both the home islands and the empire's outposts. And then in March the massive B-29 firebombing raids began, devastating Tokyo and other Japanese cities. The attack on Tokyo on March 9 alone killed some 100,000 civilians, left a million homeless and destroyed at least a quarter of the city. Gen. Curtis LeMay is quoted saying: "We scorched and boiled and baked to death more people on that night of March 9-10 than went up in vapor at Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined."
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-03-17 17:38||   2008-03-17 17:38|| Front Page Top

#17 I can trump all of that. In his autobiography Akira Kurosawa mentioned how at the time they expected the suicide order from the Emperor as the US closed in. That is everyone. 100% end of Japan rather than the dishoner of conquest. Kurasawa the very western and liberal fellow never questioned the idea, he just wanted to be married before it happened.
Posted by rjschwarz 2008-03-17 17:45||   2008-03-17 17:45|| Front Page Top

#18 You mean we'd still have to drive cars designed in Detroit?
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-03-17 17:52||   2008-03-17 17:52|| Front Page Top

#19 Nimble, as I'm sure you know, no country in history ever did more to restore its sworn enemies to health than the U.S. We later spent untold wealth on countries which, during the war, would have gladly exterminated us if they had possessed the capability. If the Aussies had had their way, Japan would never have needed Middle East oil. The amount of industry the Japs would have been allowed could have had its needs met with fish oil. The Aussies didn't take kindly to the atrocities the Japs committed against their nurses on the Kokoda Trail.
Posted by Pancho Elmeck8414 2008-03-17 18:51||   2008-03-17 18:51|| Front Page Top

#20 NS, Downfall covers the horrors of the firebombings in great detail. Also the fact that many civilians were being trained to become militia, and thus casualties in the event of an invasion.
Posted by Rambler in California">Rambler in California  2008-03-17 19:08||   2008-03-17 19:08|| Front Page Top

#21 And Nimble, we would still have had German cars to drive.

Posted by rjschwarz 2008-03-17 19:12||   2008-03-17 19:12|| Front Page Top

#22 There were a good many Americans who refused to buy German-made cars after WWII and not all of them were Jewish.
Posted by lotp 2008-03-17 19:42||   2008-03-17 19:42|| Front Page Top

#23 we would still have had German cars to drive.

Not if Truman had listened to Soviet advice and turned Germany into one giant farm.

The combined deaths, I think to 6 months after the bombings, in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 105,000. The Japanese rape of Manilla, a US territory, was 110,000 dead in 30 days of rape, bayonetting, burning and burying alive.

The A-bombs prevented at least 5 million Japanese deaths. In reality a lot more, since Japanese civilians, including children, were being armed with swords and sharped sticks for Banzai charges and would have been mowed downed by the millions with machine guns.
Posted by ed 2008-03-17 19:43||   2008-03-17 19:43|| Front Page Top

#24 Not if Truman had listened to Soviet advice and turned Germany into one giant farm.

And if we'd done that, the Soviets would probably own that farm, as well as France, Spain, and Italy, and still be in business from the plunder.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-03-17 19:52||   2008-03-17 19:52|| Front Page Top

23:57 trailing wife
23:52 3dc
23:49 JosephMendiola
23:39 JosephMendiola
23:32 JosephMendiola
23:19 www
22:57 trailing wife
22:46 JosephMendiola
22:44 trailing wife
22:41 Glenmore
22:38 trailing wife
22:36 JosephMendiola
22:36 KBK
22:33 Barbara Skolaut
22:32 Barbara Skolaut
22:28 Glenmore
22:23 trailing wife
22:23 Glenmore
22:09 JosephMendiola
22:06 DMFD
21:56 Pappy
21:55 DMFD
21:52 Cyber Sarge
21:52 Eliot Spitzer
Merry-Go-Blog










Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com