Issues of character? *sigh*
On Obama's
disturbing tendency to hang out with domestic terrorists like William Ayers.
. Kinda like all that equally asinine b.s. about Alaskan secessionism and Todd Palin. The Washington Post debunks it:
The only hard facts that have come out so far are the $200 contribution by Ayers to the Obama re-election fund, and their joint membership of the eight-person Woods Fund Board. Ayers did not respond to e-mails and telephone calls requesting clarification of the relationship. Obama spokesman Bill Burton noted in a statement that Ayers was a professor of education at the University of Illinois and a former aide to Mayor Richard M. Daley, and continued:
Senator Obama strongly condemns the violent actions of the Weathermen group, as he does all acts of violence. But he was an eight-year-old child when Ayers and the Weathermen were active, and any attempt to connect Obama with events of almost forty years ago is ridiculous.
Maybe that's why the media won't dig.
As for the ACORN thing, I only found purely circumstantial musings in right wing websites. Michelle Malkin putting it forward? Yeah, that can damage believability somewhat.
Even the
NRO article by Kurtz comes to this stunning oh-so-grounded conclusion:
Nevertheless, the possibilities suggested by a combined reading of the New York Times piece and the Foulkes article are disturbing. While keeping within the technicalities of the law, Obama may have been able to direct substantial foundation money to his organized political supporters. I offer no settled conclusion, but the matter certainly warrants further investigation and discussion.
Disturbing possibilities. All right. Just as disturbing as Palin's earmarks, I guess, which even Davis had a hard time defending today even on
freakin\' Fox . But I give Palin the benefit of the doubt. I'm sure there's more to this. Maybe something about how government works and/or concessions. It can't be this straightfoward, never is.
[Obama's] also made enough gaffes to make Dan Quayle look highly qualified.
Right. McCain has had no gaffes. None. That Sunni and Shiite Muslims confusion? Didn't happen.
As for his voting "present," Obama's shown a disturbing tendency to duck the tough issues. He's known for sponsoring bills, only to disappear when the bill became controversial.
...
Do we want a president who will duck out on all the hard issues that he would face as president?
I replied to this before. There's many ways of viewing things--your way or you can view this as someone who makes shrewd decisions and compromises and aims for the larger picture
like all politicians do. Including McCain who flip flopped on Roe v. Wade and I'm sure more on the entirety of his long career. Or you can be in the center and shrug, etc.
The only thing [Obama's] known to stand hard on is to vote "no" on a bill that would have allowed medical treatment for infants who survived late-term abortions.
. Factcheck looks at this and finds:
In discussions of abortion rights, definitions are critically important. The main bills under discussion, SB 1082 and the federal BAIPA, are both definition bills. They are not about what can and should be done to babies; they are about how one defines "baby" in the first place.
...
Obama's critics are free to speculate on his motives for voting against the bills, and postulate a lack of concern for babies' welfare. But his stated reasons for opposing "born-alive" bills have to do with preserving abortion rights, a position he is known to support and has never hidden.
And he has supported laws to protect infants in these situations, so the misrepresentation is just that (though the situation is messy overall). And regardless, we all know he's pro-choice anyone who votes on pro-life tickets, won't really find a spot here.
In any case, if it's stupid circumstantial junk/misrepresentations like this
from both sides, there is no end. Ever. Frankly, that this crap is so prevalent is an insult to anyone who's realistic enough to realize that there is always more to the lines that the campaigns feed us. BOTH of them. Obama with his banner of change has his six degrees of separation with anyone and everyone. McCain has his deer-in-headlights moments and embarrassing flubs. Biden with the plagerism. Palin, the reformer, has that troopergate foolishness. Dig around deeply enough and long enough and you'll find dirt on anyone. If it's not massive, I don't see the importance.
Character discussions are as seldom more than mudslinging. We should have a savier electorate than what the media would indicate IMO. "Judgement" is one (very subjective) thing and not to be confused with cheap and circumstantial smear tactics. The above IMO are all equally simplistic misrepresentations.
I'm actually surprised that things as trivial as whether Obama is "elitist" or why/when he wrote his memoirs are brought up. The economy is in the pits with the recent jobless report and the Freddie and Fannie mortgage buyers situation, what better moment to rip apart Obama's extremely ripable economic/health care/energy plan and talk about what makes McCain the 'duh' candidate? Not to paraphrase Obama, but it's true--the moment is perfect. I rather that than all the Bristol nonsense.
And [Palin] wasn't a stuffed-shirt lawyer who went to Harvard or Yale, but rather participated in a beauty pageant in order to win a scholarship to the University of Idaho because she couldn't afford to go to college.
Don't the Obama's have a similar story? Doesn't Biden? The bootstraps thing is quite common this year. I wouldn't be surprised if it was part of McCain's story too.
She's one of us, not one of the ruling elite.
Let's ignore that her party is the "ruling elite" for a second and all that comes with it, which makes lines like this incredibly ironic. Reminds me of that article on diversity (richest, whitest, manliest convention
) at the Republican Convention, which McCain very classily adressed in a recent interview and said that the party would work on. If only I wasn't a cocktail-sipping heathen...
Those observations aside, Slate had an
interesting article on Palin as just another American recently:
If you include the permanent fund dividend that Alaska distributes to its residents as a way of sharing oil tax revenues, the family made about $100,000 last year, not counting Sarah's $125,000 salary as governor.
Mr. Palin's income alone would put the Palins at about the same level as many well-educated, white-collar workers we knew in Anchorage. It is also enough money to enjoy a quality of life that is, at least to a certain taste, superior to what is enjoyed almost anywhere else, either in cities or in the countryside. Like the bricklayer, the Palins can hunt and fish in a place of legendary abundance. Their hometown may be a dingy Anchorage exurb, but it has cheap, plentiful land bordering a vast and beautiful wilderness, which is crisscrossed by Todd (the "Iron Dog" champion) and the Palin children all winter. (By comparison, in the Northeast many leisure activities are brutally segregated by income: Martha's Vineyard vs. the Poconos, the Jersey Shore vs. the Hamptons.)
To hold up a benchmark, the Pew Research Center said the median household income last year was $50,233.
I mean, maybe Palin's one of you, but she's certainly not like me--at least in the money and opportunities that are presented to her. It's not millions, but it's not chump change, that's for sure. I certainly wouldn't have the resources to manage a household like hers or the job flexibility she has had through her involvement in politics.
None of the candidates are "like me" or live in my world; I laugh when they pretend, thinking I can't see through them. That's why their personal stories, awesomely cool as they are (because yes, shooting moose is the bomb), are not my criteria when I vote. YMMV clearly.
Values and social class are not the same in my book. No class has a monopoly on values or anything else actually.
Instead we got someone who was real
Real to
you and that's great. Clearly, I inhabit another reality where Obama is not a lily-livered radical and Palin is not a valiant savior. Or vice versa. My reality is much, much more boring than that, even with all my wild biases.
alcyone
