House of Eratosthenes

CONS

* Little experience.
* No accomplishments.
* Poor judgment.
* A history of hanging out with anti-American scumbags.
* Lies when politically convenient.
* Wherever he isn’t exceptionally bad, he’s just a typical politician.
* Liberal.

PROS

* He’s black, so his election will be historic.

This is part of something much bigger than Barack Obama. Have you ever noticed that when left-wingers “want to be a part of this,” the “this” under discussion is seldom-to-never something that actually needs their support in order to succeed? They don’t seem to want to actually change the outcome of anything when they “want to be a part of” something. You can grow old waiting for liberals “want[ing] to be a part of” something that needs a tie-breaker vote; I don’t recall hearing of any liberals “want[ing] to be a part of” a Gore victory in 2000 or a Kerry victory in ’04.

Maybe it’s their inherent hostility to the individual. It seems they wait for the letters to be carved into the tablet of history, and after that’s been done, they want to have their hands on the chisel so they can claim to be “part of” it.

Another thing I notice is they have a propensity to support unbelievably mediocre candidates for high office, with negative claims to greatness. In other words, candidates who only can claim to not be something else. Carter wasn’t Nixon, and Kerry wasn’t Bush. When the democrat candidate for President is a Senator, it’s a Senator who can plow through a lot of years without doing much of anything. When the democrat candidate for President is a Governor of a state, there’s a curious dearth of conversation or news about how that state is doing.

Conservatives are excited about their candidates when their candidates demonstrate the ability to represent true and effective conservatism. Liberals are excited about their candidates when their candidates demonstrate the ability to lie convincingly. Gosh…it just seems that when you’re looking for entirely mediocre candidates, it should be a simple matter to find one or two with some remarkable, positive competencies — as a garnish on the dish, if nothing else — and, furthermore, free or nearly-free of “baggage.”

How come, across whole generations, they never quite seem to be able to get that done?

Ironically, the apparent culmination of years of working against predjudice based on the color of one’s skin rather than the content of their character is a bunch of people who are excited about voting for a man based on the color of his skin.
- philmon | 05/09/2008 @ 10:56
I know, I violated a bunch of English-class essay rules in one sentence there. Sister Conran, if she’s still around, needs to rap my knuckles. 😉

Do you know anyone who is actually going to vote for McCain because he’s white?

Just askin’. ‘Cause I don’t.
- philmon | 05/09/2008 @ 10:59
Do you know anyone who is actually going to vote for McCain because he’s white?

Not personally, no. But I’ve heard tell there may be a few of those types around who WILL vote for McCain if The Obamanon is the Dem nominee. We ain’t quite there yet… “there” being this “post-racial” society all TheTalking Heads are going on about.

And Morgan… you’re a bit younger than I, but I remember the election of 1960, and I remember being totally enamored with JFK. I suspect that’s a lot of what’s going on with Obama supporters today. My excuse for my irrational behavior in 1960 is “I was only 15.” I don’t have the slightest idea what the Obama supporters’ excuse(s) are…
- Buck | 05/09/2008 @ 14:14

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Their Presumptive NomineeFriday, May 9th, 2008

Their Presumptive Nominee
Friday, May 9th, 2008