Comments on: Update II: History Or More Obama Hysteria?

By: Colin Campbell

Colin Campbell — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:57:36 +0000

Obama would win the world election by a country mile if everybody outside America got to vote.

Irrelevant I know, but hopeful for peoples perception of America outside America, which is at an all time low. Surely that has to be a good thing.

[Becoming more like Eurabia?–IM]

By: Steve Stip

Steve Stip — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 21:41:03 +0000

Tim,

To vote for McCain is insane. I’m still trying to wash the blood off my hands for voting for Bush in 2000. [Makes you, like Scott McClellan, a good guy.–IM]

I will dodge tornadoes if necessary to write in Ron Paul’s name this Nov.

The “lesser of two evils” strategy has brought us to the edge.

By: Joseph Booth

Joseph Booth — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 21:23:38 +0000

Several observations. First, I’m not sure Hillary wants to be VP again. Secondly, Steve Hogan’s comment (above) probably illustrates the mindset of the typical Obama supporter – and is chilling. It’s now become clear the mainstream media helped sell his candidacy like Madison Avenue goes about selling products. Third, I think Michigan and Florida were due some penalty for going against party rules and re-scheduling their primaries for earlier in the season. To those who would say “count every vote” in this case, I’d say follow the rules. And I wouldn’t necessarily agree that even though HRC got more votes than BHO that she has some special claim to the nomination. For various reasons pure democracy ain’t all it’s cracked up to be. Remember the Founders were wise enough to establish an electoral college.

[To paraphrase from my upcoming column, Democratic Party petty rules are not to be conflated or even equated with those governing the Electoral College.–IM]

By: Steve Stip

Steve Stip — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 13:00:45 +0000

Obama: Another Roosevelt type as we head into a severe recession? Hopefully we learned our lesson from the last one. If Greenspan was Japanese, he might have done the honorable thing as a warning to his successors.

By: Tim Hopkins

Tim Hopkins — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 05:02:35 +0000

Here’s my thought. I live in Canada, so I can’t vote, but given that the war is perhaps the most crucial election issue, I suggest voting for McCain. Why? Because the Bush administrations launch of that war had disaster written all over it, and McCain’s management of the slaughter might just tip a sizable portion of the American public towards open hostility to the war. If he’s as reckless as Obama claims…Or maybe I’m just dreaming.

By: Steve Hogan

Steve Hogan — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 03:13:06 +0000

I heard two co-workers chatting about the presumptive Democratic nominee in glowing terms, so I asked them why the man was worthy of such praise. After an awkward silence, they muttered some nonsense about him being trustworthy.

“Why do you think that,” I asked? They hadn’t a clue. After some hemming and hawing, the best they could manage is that he HAD to be more honest than Hillary! No evidence or facts. Just a feeling. Wonderful.

Then I asked them to cite Obama’s positions on Iran, the debacle in Afghanistan, and the economy. Blank stares. One guy accused me of being a McCain supporter. Again, no facts. I told them I would vote for Ron Paul. They’d heard the name and knew nothing else.

I think these two intellectual giants nicely sum up the average American voter. We’re doomed.

By: Barbara Grant

Barbara Grant — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:47:23 +0000

According to recent press reports, Hillary now seems likely to admit defeat and support Obama. This is something I thought would never happen; but it will. Hillary appears to covet the vice-presidential slot; I can’t imagine Obama wanting her in that role, as she would be a constant thorn in his side if he is elected President.

It’s interesting that in the 1990s, many people in this country, including me, thought of the Clintons as “all powerful,” leaders who could do things many Americans disliked, including bombing Serbia and sending in Federal forces at Waco, and get away with it. Apparently, the “great power” of the Clintons will not result in a Hillary Presidency. They were not, apparently, the monolithic power many thought them to be.

By: Steve Stip

Steve Stip — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:47:06 +0000

There is a lot that needs changing. Only Ron Paul seems to know where the roots of the problems are. Everyone else in the race, even assuming good intentions, will probably just hack at the branches. [Or hack more of them off.–IM]

By: Tim Hopkins

Tim Hopkins — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:47:17 +0000

Andrew is right, and let me add a couple more; Obama will “unite the country”, a “fresh voice for change”, “he will bring the sides together”.

By: Andrew T.

Andrew T. — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:13:53 +0000

I never heard anyone explain their support of Barack Obama in a way that didn’t sound like incomprehensible, childish, change-change-change, his-time-is-now BS.