11 Comments Add your own

• 1. kaus  |  June 21st, 2008 at 12:08 pm

  Since Pat never posts anything negative about Obama as being true, then we have 3 hypothesis:

  1. Obama is indeed perfect and a deity for all the Universe
  2. Pat is Democratic and Proud
  3. All posters characterized by the cartoon are indeed Bush fans

• 2. Orlando Clay  |  June 21st, 2008 at 12:17 pm

  Add a “No Spin Zone” baseball cap and a “Jeb 2012″ button, you’ve got a pretty good picture of the GOP faithful here in Central Florida.

• 3. Menlo Bob  |  June 22nd, 2008 at 1:20 am

  Are there false things said about Obama? Sure. Are there true things said about Obama that Sauce would rather not discuss? Yes, because to point out his extensive shortcomings make him a hate-filled racist. Obama is perfect.

• 4. Henry  |  June 22nd, 2008 at 7:32 am

  Obama isn’t anymore perfect than McCain. But I’m not going to vote for an elderly gentlemen whose mental capacity is diminishing. He is confused on the issues (issues he supposedly knows something about - like Iraq) and admits he doesn’t have a clue about others - like the economy.

• 5. Jack O'Brien  |  June 22nd, 2008 at 7:54 am

  Menlo Bob:

  Surely you can specify at least one of Senator Obama’s “extensive shortcomings” so as to enlighten the readers of this blog.

  Since you don’t want to venture any, let me guess your suggestions (which have been elaborated on and trumpeted by the media): (1) “inexperienced,” or (2) “his former pastor makes controversial and quasi-inflammatory public comments,” or (3) “his is distantly tied to Tony Rezko,” or (4) “he did drugs years ago,” or (5) “he doesn’t have military experience.”

  Let’s make the brash assumption that all of those “shortcomings” are true. Now, let’s compare Senator Obama to our current president - who was presumably popular and competent enough to be elected twice by the American voting public. (1) George Bush was governor of Texas for 6 years before becoming president - hardly highly experienced. (2) George Bush’s outspoken religious supporters - Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson - have made equally inflammatory comments as those of Jeremiah Wright. (Including Falwell’s blaming 9/11 on gays, lesbians and abortionists and Pat Robertson’s advocacy of assassinating Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez). (3) President Bush has been directly tied to a several suspicious investment deals, including his dump of Harken stock before it sharply decreased in price and his $14 million profit on the sale of the Texas Rangers (which he purchased with a complex plan aided by state taxes). (4) Ditto. (5) Bush has no history of military service and suspiciously avoided any active combat during the Vietnam War through a series of moves in and out of various state National Guards.

  My point is that if George W. Bush was twice electable despite his “extensive shortcomings,” then Senator Obama is at least as worthy of being President.

• 6. Menlo Bob  |  June 22nd, 2008 at 10:29 am

  When asked on one of the debates to specify any experience he had at running something Obama answered that he ran his Senate office. Being governor of Texas trumps that by a very wide margin.

  I don’t recall any other ministers who’ve claimed that AIDS was developed by the US to destroy the black community. Afterwhich Obama said he couldn’t quit the church because he had a racist grandmother too.

  Suspicious investments? Rezko helped fund all of his political campaigns to the tune of $250,000. He and Rezko met frequently for lunch, and visited him in his suburban Chicago home as well as the Lake Geneva property. Since when is Chicago politics above reproach?

  Whether you accept it or not the National Guard is military service. Do you really want to talk about Dan Rather? If avoiding combat is a deal breaker you’ll have to explain Obama’s superior combat record.

  If Obama thinks that his opponent is George Bush, wouldn’t that disqualify him by that very thought?

• 7. Kaus  |  June 22nd, 2008 at 1:04 pm

  I have to get my crayon out and add another point to Menlo Bob’s side.

• 8. Jack O'Brien  |  June 22nd, 2008 at 2:13 pm

  (1) All track record differences aside, concerning candidacy for a federal executive office, being a state executive for six years simply does not trump being a federal legislator for four years by “a very wide margin.”

  (2) I never posited that Reverend Wright’s comments were not outrageous. I was merely drawing a comparison between the equally lambastic comments from both sides of the ideological divide. That is, if right-wingers want to chastise Senator Obama for being indirectly affiliated with such remarks, they must first overlook their own dirty hands.

  (3) $250,000 is a substantial amount of money. But Senator Obama promptly returned it once Rezko’s dirt became apparent. It would submit that $250,000 (even if not returned) is a drop in the bucket compared to the financial elbow-rubbing that George W. Bush has benefited from over the years (i.e. multi-million dollar investment from the Saudi royals to prop up his failed Texas oil venture in the 1980s). When Bush dumped his Harken stock, he was subject to an initial investigation for insider trading by the SEC (which is much more serious than the Obama fundraising issue).

  (4) I absolutely agree with you that the National Guard is military service. Without the National Guard, the U.S. would be substantially impaired in many ways, both foreign and domestic. However, the problem with George W. Bush’s National Guard service was that it was non-existent. He moved from base-to-base, tried to get into Texas Law School to get out of service, eventually went to Harvard Business School and completed his service part-time. There is also about a 1-year period where his whereabouts are unaccounted for (and Freedom of Information Act requests have been redacted).

  Finally, a slow, careful reading of my prior post would reveal that I was not suggesting that Senator Obama is running against Bush, nor that Senator Obama thinks he’s running against Bush.

• 9. Millard Fillmore  |  June 22nd, 2008 at 9:25 pm

  With regard to point 1 in post 8 -

  I beg to differ. Obama is one of 100 senators (so is McCain, for that matter.) A six-year governor has far more experience to bring to the table in terms of running a bureaocracy. There is no question it’s a very wide margin. Don’t believe it? Watch very closely to both vice presidential choices. If both candidates - R and D alike - don’t pick someone with governing experience somewhere on their records, I will be astounded.

• 10. Menlo Bob  |  June 22nd, 2008 at 11:53 pm

  Point 4. Even if we assume this to be correct, that George Bush skipped out on part of his military duties, he did serve and was certified as a pilot, and did volunteer for combat.

  Mr. Obama–he wrote a book whose title was lifted from the pastor of his black nationalist church. He admitted later on to making up large portions of it.

• 11. Pat Cunningham  |  June 23rd, 2008 at 7:56 am

  Bob: Who told you Bush volunteered for combat? He specifically did not. One of the questions on his National Guard application form was whether he wanted to serve overseas. He checked the box that said “do not volunteer.” Read about it here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm

Leave a Comment

Name Required

Email Required, hidden

Url

Comment

Security Code:

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed