Obama Issues Weaselly Non-Apology
Tags: Barack Obama, blogs, Democrats, Hillary, History, Kerry, Liberalism, New York, Religion.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
Barack Obama said Saturday that if he has offended people with comments he made almost a week ago where he labeled small town Pennsylvanians “bitter” and that they “cling to guns and religion” then he regrets it.
“Obviously, if I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that,” Obama said in an interview with the Winston-Salem Journal, according to a transcript provided by his campaign.
Hey, Senator – if you’re sorry you said it, then apologise for saying it. Saying your sorry if someone was offended is a cowardly dodge – makes it seem like you’re saying, “shoot, I wish those bitter, gun-toting, small town Christian racists would lighten up a bit”.
The really useful thing about this incident is how neatly it sums up the way liberal Democrats really view most of America…New York, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco – wonderful places to be full of the right sorts of people. Rest of America? A bunch of people who are a varied combination of dumb and wicked.
Over the past month or so I’ve had plenty of people send me commentary on Obama Sr’s communism and the clear indications that Obama Jr is also at least somewhat communist in viewpoint – but, of course, the communist viewpoint long ago absorbed the liberal viewpoint, and Obama isn’t the only senior Democrat with communist connections (Hillary has hers, too). These days, in a lot of ways, there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between Lenin and any so-called liberal Democrat – of course, the liberal Democrats will vehemently deny this, but that is more a function of their ignorance of just what Lenin was advocating pre-Revolution. And there lies the real problem – Obama isn’t a communist and, in fact, is likely so ignorant of history that he’s unaware that what he considers his liberalism is actually just a species of junior-league Leninism.
One of the hallmarks of Lenin and his ideology was his monunmental contempt for everyone other than himself and his prized henchmen (and even there contempt sometimes oozed out). Lenin was convinced of his superiority and absolutely convinced that he know what was best, and was also bound and determined that no pettifogging concerns for liberty and the sanctity of life would stand in the way of his program. This Leninst contempt is very well mirrored in the contempt modern American liberals hold for the vast majority of the United States – including those poorer Americans they claim to speak for. Obama, self-styled liberal and unwitting intelletual descendent of Lenin, also has this contempt for those he proposes to lead to a better life. Its natural, its easy – and all that happened here is that it came out in unmistakable terms.
And herein is also the fundamental battle of our times – between those who propose to save humanity from itself, and those who value individual humans as they are. Liberals love humanity, but have nothing good to say about the particular, individual humans, especially when those humans perversely prefer to be governed by people other than liberals. Conservatives, on the other hand, humbly admit to not knowing everything and are thus wary of any utopian programs for reform preferring, instead, to just fix what is immediately broken and allow the larger issues to work themelves over time.
For the immediate future, this gaffe will probably work to Hillary’s advantage – lot of small town people in Pennsylvania, ya know? Longer term, this gaffe could absolutely kill Obama’s chances, should he end up gaining the nomination (which, in my view, he’s still the inside favorite to do) – put out in ads and flyers around the nation, it could provide just that erg of support the GOP would need to capture such States as Pennsylvania and Michigan in the fall, thus killing any chance for a Democratic win. Only time will tell on all this, of course, but Obama’s statement here is akin to Kerry’s “global test” in 2004 as far as its potential to utterly destroy the candidate.
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
31 Responses to “Obama Issues Weaselly Non-Apology”
Caucus of Corruption
[...] Mark Noonan put an intriguing blog post on Obama Issues Weaselly Non-Apology [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
the racist should deeply regret alot of things that we have found out about him in the last few months
[...] Redstate | Conservative News and Community wrote an interesting post today on Obama Issues Weaselly Non-ApologyHere’s a quick excerptBarack Obama said Saturday that if he has offended people with comments he made almost a week ago where he labeled small town Pennsylvanians [...]
mark,
you are delirious, its amazing how you twist history to meet your viewpoints…wow.
Sam,
Well, here’s Lenin on feminism:
And here is Gloria Steinem:
You figure it out.
Mark,
You are definitely close to the truth. In an interview with Mark Steyn on the April 10th Glenn Beck show, Beck revealed stunning, totalitarism coming from Barack Obama’s wife Michelle Obama. Read what Michelle Obama said in a UCLA speech she gave….
Glenn Beck: “My gosh.”
Mark STEYN: “Yes, exactly. Soft, fluffy totalitarianism. The right to be uninvolved, the right to be left alone is one of the most precious rights in a constitutional republic. And if she wants me to shed my cynicism, she`s going to have to prize it from my cold, dead, cynical fingers.”
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/10/gb.01.html
Barack said
“Obviously, if I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that,”
He is right, The wording was awful. He might has well just came out and called everyone a bunch of Honky Ass Muthaf@%$ers.
Hillary, Barack and the liberal elites like George Soros prove that they are very out of touch with the Average American. These liberal extremists have no tolerance for Classic mainstream American Values. However, Their media and financial power gives them a real advantage and a good chance to fulfilling their lust for government big enough to reach into every aspect of your life and control everything from what you drive, to how you discipline your kids.
[...] Blogs For Victory highlights Snob-ama’s weasly apology [...]
It would be straightforward enough to simply point out that Mark is engaging in the same kind of sweeping contempt (“the way liberal Democrats really view most of America…A bunch of people who are a varied combination of dumb and wicked.”) that he accuses all “liberal Democrats” of. However, that would run afoul of the fact that Mark is such an expert on what all “liberal Democrats” think. I’m sure he’s spoken to several, which gives him all the expertise he needs to point out again that Democrats are the source of all that is evil in American politics and Republicans are the source of all that is good.
Unfortunately for Mark, the problem with his outrage over Senator Obama’s comments is that they’re based on actually talking to people who live in small towns in Pennsylvania. Unlike Mark, the junior Senator from Illinois is running for the office of President of the United States and finds himself speaking to and listening to hundreds of actual, politically-engaged American citizens every week. So, the question for the alert reader is which is more likely? Is Barack Obama inwardly oozing in contempt for small-town America because you can’t really distinguish being a liberal Democrat from being V. I. Lenin or because he has gathered a sense, however imperfect, of the thinking of real Pennsylvanians.
After all, Mark is a regular guy, a man of the people, who, by virtue of his regular-guyness is automatically and intrinsically attuned to the attitudes of all Pennsylvanians, unlike Barack Obama. There’s nothing elitist about Mark. Barack Obama might go around making sweeping statements about groups of people based on less than graduate-level research, but Mark would never do anything like that.
“Obama is hardly a member of any elite”
How many people attend Harvard, and are Senators?
“Simply put, Obama understands the perspective and frustrations of ordinary people far better than either Clinton or McCain possibly could, and his statement was a reflection of that”
Really? So why is it that he pissed so many people off with his comments?
Diana-
“they’re based on actually talking to people who live in small towns in Pennsylvania”
So did he tell these people to their faces that they were xenophobes? Did he ask them in particular why they are clinging to religion and guns? Did they actually tell him that they cling to religion and because their factories shut down? I am trying to imagine this conversation Diana, I really am. Xenophobes? Just words- Just words? Words matter remember? The Golden Boy stepped in it big time.
Freedom,
I remember when I first used the phrase “junior-league Leninists” to describe liberals…caused quite a ruckus for a bit at a friend’s blog (I wasn’t blogging at the time)…but it is just the most accurate way to describe the underlying attitudes of liberals.
Diane,
Yep, all of you – if you didn’t have this monumental contempt for average Americans, you simply would not be a liberal. One way to define “liberal” is “those who feel morally superior”.
Mark,
Project much? I’ll stand by for your evidence of my “monumental contempt for average Americans”.
By the way, you and that scholar Jonah Goldberg need to get your stories straight. He says that we’re all fascists and you say we’re all spiritual heirs of Communism. Maybe the two of you could negotiate some intellectual compromise to elevate your level of discourse, like “stinky poopyheads”.
as a conservative nation, the world loved america, droves came to our shores for he freedom and righteousness we created
then liberalism changed it
and now, as a liberal nation, the world detests us, our shores have become havens for criminals, deviants, and evils beyond imagination
thanks DP, for defending liberalism, it gives us a chance to expose it for what it is
js,
Is this supposed to be sarcasm?
if you consider killing 45 million humans in abortion clinics sarcastic, then it could be….
Oh, well yes then the killing of 45 million humans in abortion clinics is very sarcastic. I have always thought that. Not to mention that I think it’s cute and hilarious when unborn children are aborted.
In that case I was right in my assumption that your comment was sarcastic.
Diana,
You’ve been inattentive – fascism is just a bastard child of the mating of communism and nationalism. Goldberg and I are both correct – he just notes a different aspect of the problem.
And your contempt for America and Americans comes through all the time in your comments – you are only pleased with people who are exactly like you. Meanwhile, I was talking with two Democrat friends of mine today, one of whom went to the Clark County Democratic convention for Hillary, the other for Obama…my family and friends are ethnically and ideologically diverse and I hold myself to be the superior of no one (ethnically diverse? Yep, a birth this April 1st resulted in a member of the Noonan family who is of mixed race…and we look forward eagerly to more such, and not just from that couple, but from another inter-racial couple in the family whom we’re impatiently urging to get to the altar and get busy, as it were).
Mark,
As I asked, “Project much?” For all I know, never having met or spoken to you, I might like you just fine as a person. Certainly, we have our mutual faith as a grounding point.
However, you assume that because I loathe and despise virtually every policy decision of the George W. Bush Administration that I must, therefore, loathe and despise George W. Bush. From what I’ve read, President Bush is very congenial in person. However, that doesn’t keep me from hating the authoritarian nature of his decisions.
But, for you, it is enough that you have decreed, absent any knowledge of me beyond the fact that I hold political views of which you don’t approve, that I have “contempt for America and Americans”. It must make life so much easier to be so all-knowing.
so DP
the authority you identify is Bush, is it man made, or is it from God?
js,
The word I used was authoritarian which is the style of governance. George W. Bush has the authority, deriving from the Constitution of the United States and the consent of the governed, to carry out his duties as prescribed by that document until he leaves office in 283 days.
Gee, the good Christian wingnuts here seem to be reacting against the notion that religion provides solace for the hardships people face. How odd.
Goldberg and I are both correct
I’ve never seen so much wrongness condensed into six words.
I hold myself to be the superior of no one
You aren’t serious, are you? Or are you really not aware that your blog has a mountain of posts and comments by you in which you assert your de facto superiority over “liberals” because they, as liberals, are inherently wrong about everything everywhere and you, as a conservative, are far more godly? I mean, that worldview is complete bull, but still, it’s yours.
Diana,
I know liberals – and I mean the real, dyed-in-the-wool liberals who make up the world of Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, MoveOn and the core of the anti-war movement. You are of that, Diana, and the fact that you despise what Bush has done – as opposed to disagree, or think that there was a better way to do it – betrays in you a monumental contempt for people who disagree with you.
You are what you are – and as a co-religionist, it is especially my duty to call you to account, and to repentance. You’re dangerously close to judging.
Tract,
Because I hold that liberalism – so-called – is incorrect, how does that translate in to my feeling superior to liberals? Or is it the gnawing guilt in you which feels that any condemnation of your views must have a base motivation?
Believe me, I hold myself superior to no one – one of the major events of my return to Christ has been the breaking of my pride – a much-needed event which cleared the way for all which followed.
Deleted – repeats kook left conspiracy theories.
Deleted – complains about comment policy.
Hey Mark – this isn’t a comment, but a question: what was the “kook left conspiracy theory” that I repeated? Was I not addressing in specificity remarks you made on this very thread?
(Note – the God in heaven who knows all, is witness to your reply.)
Mark,
Yes, I do despise the violence that has been done to the Constitution of the United States by the actions of President Bush because that’s what it is. His actions have and are undermining the rule of law in this nation because, as did Richard Nixon, he has allowed himself to believe this anti-American creed:
So, no, I’m not going to just simply disagree because the really substantial decisions of this Administration have been carried out with the express purpose of giving the President this extra-legal status which is completely inconsistent with the nature of this country as envisioned by those who founded it.
Because I hold that liberalism – so-called – is incorrect, how does that translate in to my feeling superior to liberals?
Uhhh…because you think that they’re always wrong and you’re not and that you need to constantly “guide” them to the “right” path (see post # 28 for the most recent obvious example out of a great many). Do you really need this explained to you?
Or is it the gnawing guilt in you which feels that any condemnation of your views must have a base motivation?
Nah. I’m perfectly comfortable with my views (which, by the way, you seem to know little to nothing about, you being the lazy type who is far more comfortable inventing some views and ascribing them to me). I just think it’s funny that you are really this utterly clueless about the things you say. But most of this is just an excuse for false piety on your part, anyway, so the “who, me?” thing could just be part of the act.
PS: Funny that somebody who is convinced that every disagreement with Bush is due to a “base motivation” would make that charge against somebody else. But hey, it’s not as though you have a long and obvious history of blatant projection or anything.
If you’re tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to LobbyDelegates.com and push them to support Clinton or Obama
If you haven’t done so yet, please write a message to each of your state’s superdelegates at http://www.lobbydelegates.com
It takes a moment, but what’s a few minutes now worth to get Obama in office?!
Sending a note to current Obama supporters lets them know it’s appreciated, sending a note to current Clinton supporters can hopefully sway
them to change their vote to Obama, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Obama. It’s that easy…
Clinton Supporters
YOU can certainly make Clinton win the nomination
It takes a moment, but what’s a few minutes now worth to get Clinton in office?!
Sending a note to current Clinton supporters lets them know it’s appreciated, sending a note to current Obama supporters can hopefully sway
them to change their vote to Clinton, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Clinton. It’s that easy…
we’ll make it REALLY easy and include a list of names, addresses, and affiliations of superdelegates from each state including your state.