“Bitter” Isn’t Obama’s Only Verbal Gaffe (Bumped)
April 19th, 2008 at 01:30am Mark Noonan
Though this other one does go back to 2005, per Kirsten Powers:
Obama, whose currency is words, says he was just being sloppy in his language.
But Obama has been sloppy before. At a fancy ‘05 Manhattan fundraiser, Obama told the approving crowd that the Bush administration was using soldiers in Iraq as “cannon fodder.” It was something I expected to hear from an anti-war activist, not a US senator.
Obama clearly didn’t appreciate how disrespectful that comment would sound to many Americans, and as apparently happened in San Francisco, his staff set no ground rules that would prohibit it from being reported.
What does this tell us? Just more evidence that Obama - whatever else he may be - is an entirely out-of-touch liberal elitist. No non-elitist in his right mind - even if he opposes the war - would ever say such a thing. Only someone with monumental contempt for average Americans would use such phrasing.
One of the keys to understanding liberals is to understand that they don’t like America - not really. They like Europeanised islands within America…Manhattan, San Francisco, etc. They like that sense of intellect and sophistication which they encounter in those areas (that it is a shallow sophistication priding itself on despair is neither here nor there - liberals think that what they are getting at an expensive Manhattan restraunt after a visit to the latest art exhibit is intellect and sophistication…this is because liberals, for all their college degress, are on the whole not very well educated…and lack a sense of intellectual curiosity). For most liberals, most of what is really America is boring when not enraging.
Not long ago I was chatting with a Democratic colleague and the subject turned to the health problems of my father, and his concerns and fears therein. Over the course of the conversation we both came to understand that, just perhaps, a lot of my father’s fears stem from his not having completely made peace with God over his condition, and that making such a peace would go a long ways towards easing his mind as he confronts the awesome fact of his own mortality. This was a white, male, Catholic Republican chatting with a black, female, protestant Democrat - and across the divide (which is really non-existent at the “regular American” level), we both reached out to each other and turned towards God as the ultimate solution. Neither of us are bitter, and neither of us are clinging to religion - we are just regular Americans, with different ideas about who would be best in the White House, but with an inherent respect for each other, and at least an attempt to love each other as brothers and sisters in Christ. Obama - like almost all liberal Democrats - just doesn’t understand this. To him, and those like him, we’re supposed to be divided by sex, race, religion and ideology - and only the magic of Barack Obama can bring us together, because we’re not wise enough to do it on our own.
Just as soon as Democrats learn to leave their leftwing strongholds, so will they once again be able to become relevant to the majority of Americans. Of course, it will be painful - and it will require a lost election, or two…but the payoff will be, one day, a Christian Democratic party, able to once again provide a genuinely liberal/populist contrast to the Republican party.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats
68 Comments Add your own
1. js | April 17th, 2008 at 6:24 am
Its left over from the 60s revolution. The kids saw what thier parents did, and they think its “cool” to be anti establishment. Thats why so many yuppies are against Bush and Iraq, because they dont look behind the curtains and find out what the real truth is, what really put us there, and how just it truely is.
This upity yuppy reaction is one of the things that drives the terrorism in Iraq. They dont see American as resolute in guaranteeing freedom, so they drum up support for tyrany instead of liberty. The MSM is busy telling slanted stories, and not enough of what good is going on is coming out of Iraq. Its like a cancer.
2. JD | April 17th, 2008 at 7:23 am
This whole thing has the appearance of being a media manufactured “crisis” for Obama. As a church-going gun-owner I am bitter and cynical about our electoral process and the direction our nation has gone. We Republicans blew it when we failed to rally behind Ron Paul.
3. Pain | April 17th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Deleted - off topic.
4. Pain | April 17th, 2008 at 8:25 am
Deleted - off topic.
5. bongoman | April 17th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Deleted - off topic.
6. js | April 17th, 2008 at 9:09 am
5. Fredrick Schwartz
“I’d really like to know ”
maybe it would dawn on you if you tried to figure out why all these yuppies say “bush lied” but they cant document one single lie of substance? I mean, Bush isnt perfect, but the truth is the cia and fbi really served strongly to influence his plan of action, and the whole cause and effect is a dominoe action from gossip to rumor to (supposed) fact….no weapons in iraq my behind, Saddam and Russia cleaned them out before we got there, that doesnt mean they were destroyed in 1992, otherwise there wouldnt be any reason for Saddam to evade the UN for a decade…and list goes on, and on, and on…then the scott ritter inspectors who was bought and paid for by iraqi oil funds…so much corruption…then the propoganda that us soldiers are slaughtering iraqi women and children wholesale throughout the country…another liberal application of lies…what shaped and created this whole thing…certainly not exposure to the whole truth, nothing but a huge conspiracy to manipulate public opinion by denying them access to the truth and feeding them ignorant gossip and lies….
“Be careful it’s a trick question.”
you think that makes you look smart? wake up soldier
7. Plantation Owner | April 17th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Apparently, Obama is now displaying his patriotistm.
He is now wearing an American flag lapel pin.
What happened to his prior excuse for not wearing it????
Hmmmmmmmm…………..
Can you say “political expediency”??? - as usual with the case of any liberal.
8. Some Assembly Required | April 17th, 2008 at 9:59 am
PO, HILARIOUS… It’s a Lapel Pin dude, get over yourself.
9. js | April 17th, 2008 at 10:02 am
” I’m no longer a citizen of the US ”
so you come here to proffer your demise in your disgruntled state by insulting the USA?
your inability to rationalize is obvious, though be it a probable cause of your current state, if your consider the picture before you instead of looking for dots, you would find my answer, yet, you assume my “182″ words are empty banter…oh well.
i really couldnt givea flyin fishfart about your acts or mis-acts in ‘nam, there were a lot of flyin turds there i would describe more as junkies than soldeirs….with the mentality that kerry had…no wonder you are no longer a us citizen….
and what makes you think america would ever surrender????only the epitomy of stupidity would even consider such a tack as american…our forefathers fought and died for liberty, obvously yours was not in that lot. yours is proper in that term however, for those who value liberty put aside petty prejudice to uphold the good for all….except cowards and traitors that is….
its an honor to be in the American Legion, surrender? NUTS!!
10. Pain | April 17th, 2008 at 10:11 am
The lapel falg pin Obama wore earlier on Tuesday was given to him by a disabled veteran who asked him if he would wear it for him and Obama said he would pinned it on and did so out of respect for the man’s sacrifice for his country. The gentlemen also noted he undeerstood why Obama did not wear one and noted that it is a right that he as a veteran sought to secure not only for Obama but for evry American.
11. Carlton Pryor, Lead Economist, TED-OG | April 17th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Deleted - off topic.
12. Pages tagged "monumental"&hellip | April 17th, 2008 at 11:16 am
[…] tagged monumentalOwn a Wordpress blog? Make monetization easier with the WP Affiliate Pro plugin. “Bitter” Isn’t Obama’s Only Verbal Gaffe saved by 6 others locc187 bookmarked on 04/17/08 | […]
13. Joe | April 17th, 2008 at 11:32 am
What did we ever do before lapel pins???? How did we ever select a President?
Yet again I have to say…… you people obsess over the most idiotic things.
js, I haven’t read all the comments on this thread, but just because someone isn’t an American citizen, you won’t talk to them? That is pretty damn foolish, ain’t it? Although… I guess you are just taking after your GOP party and not talking to those that are not friendly.
14. Some Assembly Required | April 17th, 2008 at 11:49 am
I could have sworn I saw Obama wearing a Purple Tie a couple days ago… He must be a homosexual too!!!!!
John McCain is bald and has white hair, I bet he smells like old people too!!!
Hilary showed some Clevage a little while back, there was no nipple, but you could tell the intent was there…
what have politics and society come to at all? We have fallen from our Christian values… Old, homosexual, anti-American prostitutes running for office now adays.
Do you see how ridiculous the lapel pin argument is? Running for president is not a fashion show, they are not contestants on ‘what not to wear’. Please move on.
You fault Obama because he tries to speak the truth and not exactly what you want to hear. He’s speeches gather the attention of a pen drop in a silent room. Oh envy, it wears a long coat and hangs out in hallways.
15. Joe | April 17th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Deleted - off topic.
16. Plantation Owner | April 17th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
“The lapel falg pin Obama wore earlier on Tuesday was given to him by a disabled veteran who asked him if he would wear it for him and Obama said he would pinned it on and did so out of respect for the man’s sacrifice for his country. The gentlemen also noted he undeerstood why Obama did not wear one and noted that it is a right that he as a veteran sought to secure not only for Obama but for evry American.”
How convenient!
Again, can you say “political expediency”?
Anyone?
17. Joe | April 17th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Deleted - off topic.
18. Pain | April 17th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
We think it was respect Plantation Owner. A concept that true Patriots understand means that dissent of others stands on an equal platform with their own ideas.
19. Tractatus | April 17th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
I find it very funny how desperate you guys are to figure out some sort of attack strategy. You failed with “ZOMG! Obama’s a commie!” You failed with “ZOMG! Obama’s a Muslim Manchurian candidate!” You failed with “ZOMG! Obama’s got a racist, America-hating preacher!” And this latest “ZOMG! Obama’s an elitist!” one isn’t exactly catching on outside of the usual freak show. But man, are you trying your best to push it–being a wingnut means never admitting to your failures, of course, so…keep it up!
And of course, it’s always funny when Mark Noonan, who always manages to land on the wrong side of the facts, tries to look down upon the intellect of others.
20. Joe | April 17th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Tractatus,
Don’t forget that OMG Obama is a FARC-supporter! OMG Obama will put Kenyan affairs ahead of U.S.!!! OMG Obama is one of the corrupt Chicago politicians!!
Wait until he is the actual nominee…. then it will be… OMG Obama is an illegal immigrant! He had a 3rd cousin twice removed that crossed the U.S. border illegally!!
Pay no attention to the $4 a gallon for gas and all the foreclosures. That doesn’t really affect anyone. But the lapel pin………. THAT is the most important thing EVER!!!
21. Some Assembly Required | April 17th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Deleted - off topic, and blasphemous, into the bargain.
22. SteaM | April 17th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Joe,
Don’t forget that technically John McCain was born outside of the United States. Of course it was on a USA military base and I think most people would agree that that counts as being born on American soil.
However, what would republicans say if it were the other way around? If technically Obama had been born outside the US borders? They’d be calling him inelligable and screaming for him to withdraw from the race. Some people have brought this up about McCain but so far it hasn’t been something that people really talk about much because its a non-issue. Obama’s lapel pin, or lack of, on the other hand… now THAT is important.
23. Diana Powe | April 17th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
So, this must mean that Republican affiliation must be really strong. After all, since Democrats aren’t “relevant to the majority of Americans”, it would surely follow that people would identify with the GOP. So, let’s stroll over to Gallup for a look at their polling data on party affiliation which goes back to January 2-5, 2004.
From that period to their latest poll on the topic which was conducted March 14-16 of this year, they’ve done 143 polls. They break down the answers as Republicans, Independents and Democrats, but also add columns for Republicans and Democrats (including “leaners”). In those 142 polls, there have been a grand total of 12 instances where the Republicans (including “leaners”) exceeded the number of Democrats (including “leaners”). The last time that was true was the poll done March 18-20, 2005.
So, perhaps we could rework Mark’s sentence to reflect the actual data:
Just as soon as Republicans learn to leave their rightwing strongholds, so will they once again be able to become relevant to the majority of Americans.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/Party-Affiliation.aspx
24. Mark Noonan | April 18th, 2008 at 12:46 am
Diana,
The last time a Democrat won a majority of the Presidential vote was 1976.
Q.E.D.
25. What? | April 18th, 2008 at 1:46 am
Mark writes,
“Of course, it will be painful - and it will require a lost election, or two…but the payoff will be, one day, a Christian Democratic party.”
So you want a theocracy, now?
But I like this one:
“liberals think that what they are getting at an expensive Manhattan restraunt after a visit to the latest art exhibit is intellect and sophistication…this is because liberals, for all their college degress, are on the whole not very well educated…and lack a sense of intellectual curiosity.”
Viewing new art makes people intellectually incurious? I thought intellectual curiousity and the pursuit of ideas drove people to create new art and view it? Given these statement one would conclude you believe Americans should not support the creation of new art. Is this an accurate statement?
By taking your statement to the next logical step, one would conclude that reading is a sign intellectual incuriosity and dimwittedness. What is the substantive difference between art on the page and art on the canvass?
You assume all people who go to art galleries are phonies. Some are. But for many “liberals” and “conservatives”, art provides inspiration, nourishes thought, and offers a medium in which to explain the human experience.
You project the worst onto your opponent, Mark. Perhaps by looking at “liberal” art you will come to realize the enemy is not as vicious and base as you believe it to be.
26. Mark Noonan | April 18th, 2008 at 2:14 am
What,
Have you any conception of what a Christian Democrat part would be like? I mean, aside from stepping away from an anti-human zeal for abortion, a Christian Democrat party would be economically pretty liberal and in many respects right up a conventional liberal’s alley…it would not, of course, feel like home to a kook leftist, but the point of making a Christian Democrat party is precisely to get rid of those millstones.
Anyways…
What I was thinking about in modern art is things like this, on display at the Museum of Modern Art.
Viewing new art is very intellectually stimulating - but what liberals key on to is exhibitions of recycled sh**. There hasn’t been anything new in art for decades now, save for the fact that liberals - golly gee, they’re so smart - have mainstremed things like gay porn.
Year after year, upper class liberals gather at the galleries and theaters and are fed the same nonsense, slightly varied, and they ooh and ahh over it and congratulate themselves on being just oh, so hip and intellectual…meanwhile, if you and I - as a joke - were to buy up one of the more prestige publications on art and just make up the first thing we put into our heads as the next wave in modern art, liberal pinheads would swallow it whole…because they are intellectually incurious. The herd instinct in the liberal ranks is astounding!
As I drove home from work today, I was listening to Mozart - music written more than two centuries ago, still inspiring people who live in a world stunningly different from that which Mozart lived in. Why? Because Mozart made real musical art - art which speaks to human hopes and dreams. He dealt, that is, with truth…which bit of modern music will be listened to in 2208? Where is the modern Michealangelo who’s paintings and sculptures will amaze the world 500 years from now?
I’m sure they are out there - but liberals don’t have the first clue about them.
27. Jeremiah | April 18th, 2008 at 2:27 am
What?
The harm in Liberals “arts” per se, is that it is always humanistic, pointing to the works of man, instead of the One who created the mind to be Creative, and giving Him all the credit and praise.
Going to the next level, Liberal arts always gives the examples of indulgence on the whole. Most of it is either untalented or perverted, things not natural to the human soul and body.
Examples include - Plastic molded into piles of excrement exiting three bodies.
Really, all it does is it shows how sadistic our society has become by adopting Liberalism as their form of government, as Liberals either allow or encourage these obscenities to be shown, much the same as the entertainment industry, the arts and entertainment have become avenues for Satan to work his poison…and the people are loving every minute of it.
One day, Yes,One day God is going to judge this Nation, but it’s going to be too late to cry out to Him for help!
28. What? | April 18th, 2008 at 3:22 am
Hmm,
I knew you would revert to where are all the Leonardos.
Quite frankly, I like both the exhibits you cited and see art in both of them.
As for the first, I realize abstract art is not for everyone. For me, A Rotheko is less about intellectualism and more about how it makes me feel when I look at it. Art doesn’t have to be about something. It does not always have to render real life to have value. An example would be Jackson Pollack. Granted, his work is simple. But his painting reflect the way I sometimes feel. Because they have this affect, they have value to me. It certainly means more to me than a Thomas Kincaid painting which really does nothing for me. If people like collecting paintings of churches by streams, let them.
I find it funny you praise Michaelanglo and then denegrate Maplethorpe. If Michaelanglo could have, he would have been doing work far more like Maplethorpe’s than what he was doing for the Pope. When I look at The David, I see a very homosexual artist desparate to stop painting the Madonna with child and start painting some naked men wrestling.
Mark, the fault you make is that you place your opinion on art above others and justify doing so by projecting alterior motives those holding differing opinions.
It is entirely possible that others find value and inspiration in something you do not, and are not just being phonies.
What is ironic about your comment is that you are accusing “liberals” of cultural elitism while denouncing them for having bad taste. Aren’t you exhibiting the same elitism they exhibit by passing judgement on what is and is not worthwhile art?
You might say you are different because you are a populist when it comes to art. But c’mon. I mean, Mozart, talk about snobbery. Last time I checked the only person in the classical music section of my record store was the weird old employee who grumbled about “those young kids and their popular music.” Also, symphony goers are not exactly humble working class folk. You could just as easily accuse them of elitism as people in the art world.
Also, I think you are falling back on a stereotype of people in the art world as being foppish and pretentious. The stereotype is certainly not a complete myth. It can’t be considering the field. Like you and this website, these people are asserting they know what matters and know what is going on. Their career is based on the premium of their opinion so inevitably, being an artist or and art dealer requires some degree of confidence and pretension. (Really, would people visit this site if you did not express such an absurd degree of certainty in your opinions?) Also, given the odds of financial success, people who lack such confidence quickly leave the fine art world and find careers in graphic design.
Also, you lost me with your whole Christian Democrat thing.
29. What? | April 18th, 2008 at 3:33 am
Jeremiah,
How do you even go outside? It seems like any exposure to society puts one in danger of contact with Satan.
You must answer the following question for me. What is heaven like? I ask because I like the culture and society I live in despite your claim of its evilness. If heaven is just like an eternity of church, I think hell might be the better choice. Come to think of it, an eternity of sitting through church is a form of hell.
Also Mark,
You claim liberals hate America. Jeremiah seems to hate it more than anyone on this site.
30. Mark Noonan | April 18th, 2008 at 3:48 am
What,
I’ll leave you to ponder the Christian Democrat concept for a while - you’re a clever person, and it’ll will clarify itself for you if you think it over…you still might disagree with the concept, but it won’t be over an absurdity such a theocracy.
Anyways…
I bring up Mozart mostly as a coincidence - I happend to be listening to Mozart this afternoon, and thus it was at the forefront of the thing I use for a brain…but it is neatly illustrative; 250 years on, its still listened to…name for me even one modern musician you think will be listened to even 50 years from now, let along 250 years.
I’ve heard all those saws about modern art - ad-nauseaum, I’ve heard them. Art is supposed to tell us something, or it isn’t art - its just gibberish. Might as well have a machine randomly daub paint on canvas - the effect would be no different, and the meaning the same - meaning, of course, that there would be none.
I’d say that Picasso was the last artist (at least in painting) to tell us something - and it wasn’t much, and was mostly about Picasso. Dali was interesting, too, but mostly because he demonstrated that people would consider sh** to be art and pay a premium for it. Since then, it has been just gibberish, with frequent side trips over to blasphemy and pornography.
You may think that Michelangelo was desperate to have some Mapplethorp in his portfolio, but what Michelangelo was doing was to tell the truth about humanity - or, at least, a part of the truth…Mapplethorp is all about slick pornography designed to elicit the sex drive. I can see a beautiful male figure in Michelangelo’s “David“, but it arouses nothing in me but admiration for the artist and the subject…what is aroused by this? For me, its just porn - something someone might want, but not art, not by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, it bears the same relationship to art as masturbation does to sex.
A bit of thinking, a bit of intellectual curiosity - and this whole worthless mess of modern art will be swept away…and that, of course, is the last thing anyone in the field wants…people and museums have paid tens of mllions of dollars for this crap, and they daren’t allow anyone to point out that the Emperor has no clothes…
31. Dennis | April 18th, 2008 at 3:52 am
Mark has taken a tangent about art, and curiously enough, in a sense I find a bit of common ground here. I also have been frustrated by a lot of contemporary art produced today. Way too much has been pretentious, derivative or lacking in originality and technical expertise. What succeeds has largely commercial appeal and application; artists like Warhol recognized the crassness of the market and made their fortunes exploiting it.
But the long-dead patronage system of music and art production enabled a kind of specialization and output that one doesn’t find today; most artists now live on the fringes of the economy. And I speak as a sometime artist with many friends in the arts.
It ain’t like it used to be, and even in Mozart’s day the most talented did not make it without attracting patronage. Where would Beethoven or Michelangelo, for that matter, have been without aristocratic or royal patronage? Would we even know their names? I would suggest that many gifted artists today remain buried in obscurity because the marketplace does not reward them sufficiently to enable them to rise to their highest potential. Hence we have exhibits like the one at MOMA, in which the principles and tastes of the lowest common denominator rule.
And, umm, Jeremiah - I’m sorry, but you’re just sick.
32. Dennis | April 18th, 2008 at 4:10 am
I failed to mention - even Mozart, whose immense talent made him a genuine freak of nature, spent most of his final years in debt. Only by herculean effort did he manage to leave his family a legacy that enabled them to live comfortably after his death.
33. Tractatus | April 18th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Also, you lost me with your whole Christian Democrat thing.
Hell, he lost himself with that one. Mark has stated that there is no such thing as a “Christian Democrat”–such a person is either not really a Christian or not really a Democrat.
34. What? | April 18th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Mark,
You are entitled to your opinion. What is art is a subjective question. If you don’t get it, you don’t get it. I don’t get why people buy Thomas Kincaid paitnings, but I don’t think of those people as idiots or lowbrows. They enjoy it on a level I don’t.
What is pornography is also a subjective question. Where you see filth, I see art.
The beauty of art is that it is personal.
As for your music question, how am I suppose to guess what will make it and what won’t? But to say all current culture is disposable is an overly broad statement. All eras of all past societies pass down some part of their cutlure to the modern era.
I can say you are being a snob by saying classical is somehow better or more timeless than other genres. What about the blues? I still listen to blues music that has been around since the recording industry started. That speaks to me just as much as classical.
What this all comes down to is your overall dissatisfaction with the era in which you live. This is a theme that runs throughout your diatribes. If you choose to place the past on a pedestal and lament the present, go ahead. I prefer to live in the present and experience our culture as it is created while also enjoying the triumphs of its past.
Also what is with this:
“I’ll leave you to ponder the Christian Democrat concept for a while - you’re a clever person, and it’ll will clarify itself for you if you think it over…you still might disagree with the concept, but it won’t be over an absurdity such a theocracy.”
Total cop out Mark. How am I suppose to figure out what you mean if you can’t even explain your own ideas? This is not the first time you refuse to explain yourself. It makes you look like you don’t even understand your own thoughts.
35. Jeremiah | April 18th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
What?,
You say, “What is heaven like?” A wonderful place, more than you can know. I want to be there, don’t you?
Also, “I think hell might be the better choice.”
You’ll find out!
To Dennis:And, umm, Jeremiah - I?m sorry, but you?re just sick.
Sure thing, Dennis. But there’s one thing for sure, we don’t need your brand of hypocrites running things, that’s for sure! And we need to get every last one of your kind out of our schools, especially what’s kind….they’re nothing but Snakes, biting our children with their poisonous rhetoric.
Being in our country we need to know what your up to at all times. At any rate, Why don’t you just get out of my country. eh? I’m sick of your kind, fed up to the gills with Liberals.
36. Mark Noonan | April 19th, 2008 at 1:43 am
what,
I place on a pedastal truth - and such truths as are uttered in our modern era also go there…unfortunately, in our modern arts, there isn’t much truth. You can say all you want that the linked picture is art, but you know full well that it is pornography - very well done pornography, but porn none the less…and the real sorrow is that the photographer clearly had talent, and choose to waste it on the relentless objectification of his fellow human beings.
The divide between right and left is quite wide - and is almost entirely the result of the left’s failure to learn about the right. We know you guys on the left like the backs of our hands - while your views of us are a dog’s breakfast of lies and distortions. Obama’s statements about people bitterly clinging to religion and racism in a changing world is a prime example of this lack of basic knowledge - and your clear dismay over the very concept of “Christian Democrat” demonstrate your similar lack of knowledge. Isn’t it time that you - and Obama - learned a bit about us?
37. Diana Powe | April 19th, 2008 at 2:51 am
Professor Noonan pontificates:
1) I know all there is to know about liberals.
2) Part of all that I know is that liberals are devils.
3) Part of their being devils is they don’t understand conservatives such as myself.
4) The reason I know they don’t understand me is that they persist in disagreeing with me.
5) When they agree with me then I will know they aren’t devils.
Class dismissed.
38. Mark Noonan | April 19th, 2008 at 3:07 am
Diana,
I’ve been working on a response, but I am bound by the rule of doing unto others, and if I ever made a similar remark, I’d pray that everyone were meciful to me..
Really, do you have anything to add here, or are you just required by some sort of DNC contract to put something up, no matter how relevant or true it is?
39. What? | April 19th, 2008 at 3:25 am
Mark writes:
“and is almost entirely the result of the left’s failure to learn about the right.
Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!
Mark, this entire website is devoted to dreaming up horrid visions of liberals. This very post does that. You call liberals incurious, stupid, arrogant, pretentious, uneducated, and a host of other bad names. Now you get upset because someone calls you bitter? What a joke. It is not just you, of course. What do you think right wing radio is all about? Hannity compares liberals to terrorists. Look at what Jeremiah says about the left. If anyone has a comically distorted view it is you and your followers.
Also, the Obama bitterness comment is not entirely inaccurate in your case is it, Mark? In fact it explains why you adhere to such devilish images of the left. You are bitter and jealous of those who have more education than you. Your solution is to criticize that education instead of attaining one. Why else would you take every opportunity to denounce higher learning?
Furthermore, why should Obama learn more about you? You would not vote for Obama. The people who care about Obama’s comment are conservatives who have no plan to vote for Obama.
As for me I made an effort to “understand you.” Having viewed this website over the past half year, I have learned about you and have been appalled by what I have seen.
You have:
- Called homosexuality a social disease (and then denied it)
- Said reading was not all that important
- Religiously preached every negative stereotype of the left.
- Determined the left wants to destroy the country.
- Told me that art that I appreciate and enjoy is either a) worthless or b) pornography
Conservative Commenters on here have:
- Said black people should be thankful for all that white people have given them.
- claimed black people were responsible for the inequality they suffer.
- Told me I am going to hell
- claimed all people on welfare are lazy
Mark, given all that you have said, what am I suppose to think of conservatives? Do you feel you represent what America should stand for?
My clear dismay over the idea of a Christian Democratic Party is the same dismay expressed by our founders who were wary of mixing politics with religion. It is also born out of my observations of other countries that have infused religionand government. The very countries you seem so intent upon bombing because they are filled with religious zealots.
I can see you are still upset about the whole absolute truth discussion we had earlier. So please explain why your opinion on what is and what is not art reflects the absolute truth.
Before you do that, let me show you what you are trying to prove.
Say we both try a restaurant. You say it is good and I say it is not. Your theory of absolute truth dictates that my opinion on the restaurant is absolutely wrong. That my judgment is not only uninformed, or hastily reached, but wrong in the sense that 2+2=5 is wrong. You are saying I am not entitled to my opinion because my opinion is devoid of truth.
So prove to me why your opinion is not an opinion but fact.
40. Diana Powe | April 19th, 2008 at 3:38 am
Mark,
This entire site is almost exclusively devoted to how liberals are the enemy and the predominant cause for all that is wrong with the world with much of it driven by various malicious motives. It is also devoted to the premise that conservatives are always correct, of if sometimes incorrect, always well-intentioned, unlike liberals. My post didn’t say that you are wrong in espousing this point of view. It simply pointed out the fact that it is your view, as amply demonstrated by post after post and comment after comment such as your latest jibe about how I must be being paid by the Democratic National Committee.
You’ve complained that liberals won’t make an attempt to understand conservatives. Well, I’ve been here at what prides itself as a bastion of conservatism doing just that by reading the posts and comments. The fact that I rarely find them persuasive (although I’ve sometimes noted such in comments when I have, such as your analysis on the problems of Wikipedia) is, from your standpoint, a problem of either my bias or my diminished intellect, yes?
41. Mark Noonan | April 19th, 2008 at 3:44 am
What,
I believe that is the second time you’ve accused me of that vis a vis homosexuality…you’d better find an exact quote of me saying something like that, or you’d better apologise. The fact that you insist I said such a thing is a clear indicator that you’re not paying attention at all - you just presume I’m saying something that you stereotypically expect conservatives to say, and then you respond to that.
And, as an aside, I’m a big fan of education - and just as soon as you get one, I’ll congratulate you.
42. Freedom1 | April 19th, 2008 at 3:53 am
Hey Mark,
Speaking of education, I just saw Ben Stein’s excellent movie, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”. I highly recommend it!
BTW, don’t mind the moonbats. The fact that these moonbats are completely perplexed by the concept of “Christian Democrat” is just indicative of how far gone they really are.
43. Mark Noonan | April 19th, 2008 at 3:54 am
Diana,
Half of the most recent posts on this blog are posts about things we’re in favor of - the other half are attacks on Democrats/liberals. You are aware that this is an election year, right?
Anyways…
What you are saying - in a pretty asinine manner - is that I consider you to be wicked for disagreeing with me. That is not the case at all - I have all sorts of people in my life who disagree heartily with me, and they aren’t wicked…just wrong, as you are wrong. You should bear in mind that more and more often the emotion that wells up in me as I read liberal/left comments here on the blog is pity - I’m sorry for you, and the rest of the liberals, that you have cut yourself off from so much.
While you liberals have a lot of contributors to your errors, the biggest thing you’ll have to overcome is your overweening pride in yourselves…you just think you’re so smart! Well, you’re not - in fact, you can barely hold a candle to the really great intellects of modern times (people like Sowell, Krauthammer, Hanson, Schönborn, etc…) and your lack of historical knowledge is a real problem in these debates because it makes it hard for us to write something without having to digress heavily in order to explain to you the underlying support for our points of view.
There are, of course, vast things I don’t know - and I lean on those who do, when I confront those issues where my ignorance far outweighs my knowledge. All it takes is a dimunation of my pride and then I’m all set to receive instruction…if you’d even for a moment admit that there are things that I - and other conservatives - know which you don’t, you’d be a long way down the road towards become a genuine intellectual.
44. Mark Noonan | April 19th, 2008 at 3:57 am
Freedom,
I’m looking forward to seeing that, as well…and a post about it comes up in the morning.
45. Freedom1 | April 19th, 2008 at 3:58 am
Great, Mark!
46. steveGA | April 19th, 2008 at 8:53 am
Mark,
For someone who constantly criticizes others for hating America, you sure do hate large parts of the country.
What exactly is wrong with Manhattan? Its the center of the nation’s financial industry, isn’t that an important and worthwhile endeavor? Where exactly does the anti-American New York end, and the rest of America begin? If you live across the river from Manhattan, but can see Manhattan from your window, are you an America-hating elitist, or a red, white, and blue ordinary American?
By the way, don’t you live in Las Vegas? Are we to believe that gambling, prostitution, and Paris Hilton are more American than Central Park, Wall Street, and the Empire State Building?
47. kimberly4victory | April 19th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Excellent OPEd piece in the NYT:
Back in Iowa, Barack Obama promised to be something new — an unconventional leader who would confront unpleasant truths, embrace novel policies and unify the country. If he had knocked Hillary Clinton out in New Hampshire and entered general-election mode early, this enormously thoughtful man would have become that.
But he did not knock her out, and the aura around Obama has changed. Furiously courting Democratic primary voters and apparently exhausted, Obama has emerged as a more conventional politician and a more orthodox liberal.
He sprinkled his debate performance Wednesday night with the sorts of fibs, evasions and hypocrisies that are the stuff of conventional politics. He claimed falsely that his handwriting wasn’t on a questionnaire about gun control. He claimed that he had never attacked Clinton for her exaggerations about the Tuzla airport, though his campaign was all over it. Obama piously condemned the practice of lifting other candidates’ words out of context, but he has been doing exactly the same thing to John McCain, especially over his 100 years in Iraq comment.
Obama also made a pair of grand and cynical promises that are the sign of someone who is thinking more about campaigning than governing.
He made a sweeping read-my-lips pledge never to raise taxes on anybody making less than $200,000 to $250,000 a year. That will make it impossible to address entitlement reform any time in an Obama presidency. It will also make it much harder to afford the vast array of middle-class tax breaks, health care reforms and energy policy Manhattan Projects that he promises to deliver.
Then he made an iron vow to get American troops out of Iraq within 16 months. Neither Obama nor anyone else has any clue what the conditions will be like when the next president takes office. He could have responsibly said that he aims to bring the troops home but will make a judgment at the time. Instead, he rigidly locked himself into a policy that will not be fully implemented for another three years.
If Obama is elected, he will either go back on this pledge — in which case he would destroy his credibility — or he will risk genocide in the region and a viciously polarizing political war at home.
Then there are the cultural issues. Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos of ABC News are taking a lot of heat for spending so much time asking about Jeremiah Wright and the “bitter” comments. But the fact is that voters want a president who basically shares their values and life experiences. Fairly or not, they look at symbols like Michael Dukakis in a tank, John Kerry’s windsurfing or John Edwards’s haircut as clues about shared values.
When Obama began this ride, he seemed like a transcendent figure who could understand a wide variety of life experiences. But over the past months, things have happened that make him seem more like my old neighbors in Hyde Park in Chicago.
Some of us love Hyde Park for its diversity and quirkiness, as there are those who love Cambridge and Berkeley. But it is among the more academic and liberal places around. When Obama goes to a church infused with James Cone-style liberation theology, when he makes ill-informed comments about working-class voters, when he bowls a 37 for crying out loud, voters are going to wonder if he’s one of them. Obama has to address those doubts, and he has done so poorly up to now.
It was inevitable that the period of “Yes We Can!” deification would come to an end. It was not inevitable that Obama would now look so vulnerable. He’ll win the nomination, but in a matchup against John McCain, he is behind in Florida, Missouri and Ohio, and merely tied in must-win states like Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. A generic Democrat now beats a generic Republican by 13 points, but Obama is trailing his own party. One in five Democrats say they would vote for McCain over Obama.
General election voters are different from primary voters. Among them, Obama is lagging among seniors and men. Instead of winning over white high school-educated voters who are tired of Bush and conventional politics, he does worse than previous nominees. John Judis and Ruy Teixeira have estimated a Democrat has to win 45 percent of such voters to take the White House. I’ve asked several of the most skillful Democratic politicians over the past few weeks, and they all think that’s going to be hard.
A few months ago, Obama was riding his talents. Clinton has ground him down, and we are now facing an interesting phenomenon. Republicans have long assumed they would lose because of the economy and the sad state of their party. Now, Democrats are deeply worried their nominee will lose in November.
Welcome to 2008. Everybody’s miserable.
48. Tractatus | April 19th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
We know you guys on the left like the backs of our hands - while your views of us are a dog’s breakfast of lies and distortions.
They are wrong, wrong, wrong about everything; we, on the other hand, are as right about things as fallible human beings are ever likely to be, and right makes might.
the biggest thing you’ll have to overcome is your overweening pride in yourselves…you just think you’re so smart!
Ah, the many hypocritical faces of Mark Noonan. How can one man simultaneously hold these views? Why, cognitive dissonance and a startling degree of projection, of course!
49. Mark Noonan | April 19th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
SteveGA,
I guess the difference between Manhattan and Sin City is that we out here in the great American outback know that sinning is going on in those casinos…Manhattanites tend to look upon sins as virtues.
I’ve been in Manhattan - it is a fascinating place to be, but some place I’d never want to live…a bit more two dimensional and people are indistinguishable from each other…black, white, hispanic, “other” - all dressed alike, all doing the same things…and, if election results are an indicator, thinking alike. They are mine - my fellow Americans, but I think they’ve spent too much time in the upper-class bubble…they need to get out more…say, to Elko, Nevada and just have a beer and a burger with the folks out there.
50. What? | April 19th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Mark,
Comment 25 in your Multi Culti Pretzel Post. I have told you this once before and quoted your words. Go check, come back, and apoligize.
Also, please explain what you consider an education. It appears only hard right conservatives are capable of having one.
51. What? | April 19th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Mark,
One minute you say we are sinful, incurious, uneducated devils. The next minute you want us to come to Elko, Nevada and hang out with you.
Why would we take you up on that invitation?
Why would we want to spend one minute with you. Why would you want us to spend one minute with us? Oh yeah, so you can tell us how terrible we are so you can make yourself feel good.
You are the most pristine culture warrior I have ever seen.
What would kill you is if you actually met some of us and we fell far below the image you have created. It would be a cold introduction to reality, indeed.
52. Jeremiah | April 19th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
What would kill you is if you actually met some of us and we fell far below the image you have created. It would be a cold introduction to reality, indeed.
You know something, What?
The fact is, I’ve met a lot of nice, easy-going, well-mannered folks, people just as you describe yourself, or so you say…
But you know what, there are going to be a lot of nice, easy-going, well-mannered, charitable, moral people be lost and go to a Devil’s Hell because they refused to accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior….and that’s a fact.
Jesus even said, ‘Who is it that overcomes the world, only he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God.’
Now, I don’t doubt for one second that you and I could set down together over a luncheon and agree to disagree, shake hands and part our ways and never change a bit …. but there’s that fundamental fact in truth that will always stand for all eternity … even though you are moral, there is only one hope for your life and that’s through knowing Jesus Christ as Lord!
53. What? | April 20th, 2008 at 1:47 am
But Jeremiah,
What if you are wrong? What if you picked the wrong savior?
54. Freedom1 | April 20th, 2008 at 2:35 am
Yes, Jesus Christ is Our Lord and Savior!
55. Jonathan | April 20th, 2008 at 3:44 am
But you know what, there are going to be a lot of nice, easy-going, well-mannered, charitable, moral people be lost and go to a Devil’s Hell because they refused to accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior….and that’s a fact.
If Heaven is full of crazies like you, Jeremiah, then I think I’m better off in Hell. At least they’ll be lots of same people suffering with me.
56. steveGA | April 20th, 2008 at 9:52 am
Mark,
Vegas, a city built by the Mob and driven economically by gambling, is less sinful than Manhattan? This makes no sense, even by your low standards of logic. The idea that the residents of Vegas are somehow more virtuous/ less sinful/ more American than Manhattanites is ludicrous. I’ve been to Vegas and Manhattan, and the analogy is simple: pawnshops and blood banks are to Vegas what coffee shops are to Manhattan; they’re everywhere.
By the way, you do know that you can get fantastic burgers and great beer in Manhattan, don’t you?
57. FmrMarine | April 20th, 2008 at 10:07 am
what? TF
>>>>
What if you are wrong? What if you picked the wrong savior?<<<<
THEN
He would have lived a good, clean, dedicated, moral, life.
He would not end up with, aids, syphilis, lung cancer, drug/alcohol addiction etc.
He would not have gambled away his family’s fortune.
He would not be a thief, robber, adulterer, murderer.
He would not kill his child in the womb, or his mother in a nursing home.
He would tithe 10% of his wages to the poor, he would help the down trodden.
He would not blow up innocent children in schools, malls, fly airplanes into buildings.
NOT so bad eh?
58. FmrMarine | April 20th, 2008 at 10:11 am
JONathan;;
>>>If Heaven is full of crazies like you, Jeremiah, then I think I’m better off in Hell. At least they’ll be lots of same people suffering with me.<<<
There will be a day you RUE those words.
Be CAREFUL for what you wish - you may not like the results.
59. What? | April 20th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
But Former Marine,
He is not looking to live clean for the hell of it. He is, quite selfishly, looking how to get into heaven.
By following the wrong path he will have failed.
He also would have spent his whole life in a basement worshipping a false god. That is a pretty terrible fate.
60. Mark Noonan | April 20th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
what,
Incorrect - Jeremiah’s salvation (and yours, if you so wish) is available for the asking…in the end, all you have to do is ask for it, even if you ask for it just a minute before you go.
What Jeremiah, and the rest of the Christians, are trying to do is live out their faith…faith without works is a dead thing, but no amount of works - in and of themselves - will get a person into heaven.
It isn’t a deal, you see? Its a gift - a gift freely given by a God who didn’t need to give it, and a gift no human being can earn. God isn’t up there with a checklist going, “Ok, what had 1,957,412 good works, and 1,957,411 sins…so, he’s in!”
61. What? | April 20th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Mark writes,
Jeremiah’s salvation (and yours, if you so wish) is available for the asking…in the end, all you have to do is ask for it, even if you ask for it just a minute before you go.
Okay, I’ll direct the question at you, too.
What if it isn’t? What if you are completely wrong about your entire faith? Everything you learned was untrue. People who practice Wicca actually were right all along.
Also, are you going to admit you called homosexuality a social disease and apoligise to me?
62. What? | April 20th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Mark Noonan writes,
“I pray for all my friends - and even you - to turn towards God and seek his love, but in the grand scheme of things, homosexual sex rates a lot lower in the realm of social pathologies than, say, the systemic attack on the family by the State, or the pervasive pornography and violence in our popular culture”
Comment 25: Multi Culti Pretzel
63. Mark Noonan | April 21st, 2008 at 1:19 am
what,
Social pathology, not social disease. In this meaning: “any deviation from a healthy, normal, or efficient condition”. You’re reading into my comment an insult when none was made, or even remotely intended.
Anyways…
What if my faith in Jesus is misplaced? What would it matter?
At any rate, my faith is not misplaced - once upon a time, a man came along and told people who had sinned that their sins were forgiven by God…such a man is either a lunatic, or he’s Lord.
To say that Jesus was just another moral teacher is absurd - his teaching is only the sort of teaching which God would provide; no mere man would think of it…pray for those who abuse you? Are you kidding? Love your enemies? Why should anyone do that? If anyone is suing you, go ahead and give him what he wants? Absurd! But it all makes perfect sense - it makes sense in a world created by God, who wants everyone to come to Him, and be blessed forever.
There is nothing quite like it in all of recorded history - and its effect has been stunning. To this day, people surrender all they have and dedicate themselves to the selfless service of complete strangers. To this day people turn in prayer to Jesus, and are comforted in their tribulations. To this day, people will die rather than deny that Chris is their saviour.
No, what, this Jesus is not just another man,a nd faith in him is not misplaced.
64. What? | April 21st, 2008 at 2:12 am
Mark writes
“Social pathology, not social disease. In this meaning: “any deviation from a healthy, normal, or efficient condition”. You’re reading into my comment an insult when none was made, or even remotely intended.”
Mark, how is that not an insult? If I called you a social pathology, you would consider it a compliment? Also you made a mistake to pair it with pornography. It shows your true intent since you consider pornography a bane on society that should be done away with.
You accuse Obama of twisting words. Calling the kettle black, aren’t we?
65. What? | April 21st, 2008 at 2:21 am
Mark writes:
“To say that Jesus was just another moral teacher is absurd”
So Mark just called every other religion on the planet absurd. Nicely done.
Mark writes:
“There is nothing quite like it in all of recorded history - and its effect has been stunning. To this day, people surrender all they have and dedicate themselves to the selfless service of complete strangers. To this day people turn in prayer to Jesus, and are comforted in their tribulations. To this day, people will die rather than deny that Chris is their saviour.”
Um yeah,
Maybe instead of just talking about Tibet, you should study it. Seems like Buddhists are pretty devout, too.
What would it matter if your belief in Christianity was misplaced?
Well, the true deity would be pretty upset you have been worshipping someone else your whole life.
66. Ang'ki Hoor I | April 21st, 2008 at 11:32 am
65. What? | April 21st, 2008 at 2:21 am
I am reticent about dealing with matters that invove the Living, but if I am allowed I would like to point out that “social pathology” is defined as a factor that contributes to a grater social ill. So Mr Noonan points to homosexuality as a symptom not as the disease itself. This disease to Mr Noonan is the combinination of all things “Liberal” and anything outside of his religious world view that offends his senses.
And for a man like Mr Noonan who has so much invested in the correctness of his faith to even consider that his Deity may not exist is perceived as beyond the pale for a very simple reason– to give such ideas creedence means that his entire life has been a waste of time and has had no value. It is an efficient system because there is no means by which, ever it is hoped by the Living to apply Occam’s razor or the keen eye of observation to give a definitive answer. Such faith as the type held by Noonan is the perfect hedge as long as on is certain that all who think and act like you are “saved” and all Others are “lost.”
67. Mark Noonan | April 22nd, 2008 at 1:52 am
what,
Well, homosexual sex is a moral error along the lines of pornography - both are misuses of sexuality.
Be that as it may…
All other religions are absurd? I wouldn’t go that far - they are, of course, all incorrect to a greater or lesser degree. One doesn’t be a Christian by thinking that a different theology might have it more right, after all. If I thought Hinduism, or what have you, was closer to Truth, then I’d be a Hindu…but I believe that Christianity is the most true religion, and so I am a Christian.
As for God being angry over someone who worshipped the wrong way - if it is a sincere error, I can’t imagine a loving God rejecting such a person at Judgement. While we Christians hold - per Christ’s instruction - that no one comes to the Father except through Jesus, we acknowledge that a man who knew nothing of Jesus, or insufficient of him to accept him as Lord, can still come to the Father through Jesus if he lives a moral life in accordance with the truth written on all human hearts.
68. Smelly Cat | June 27th, 2008 at 7:47 am
Obama’s Government Record Raises Questions
Given what you know about Barack Obama why is anyone comfortable with having him driving us into our future?
He is a tax and spend liberal.
He supports affirmative action in colleges and government.
He has been identified as having the most liberal Senate voting record.
He believes in global warming.
He wants to pull our troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq despite Pentagon advice to the contrary.
He voted for biofuel without thinking long-term, which has raised futures markets and therefore food prices worldwide.
He is on record as willing to raise your taxes.
He bought land & a home from his friend Tom Rezko who’s under investigation for demanding kickbacks from companies wanting to do government business in IL.
He is against sending 12,000,000 illegal aliens home and wants to reward them with a path to citizenship.
He wants to push for a Jimmy Carter style windfall oil tax that is guaranteed, as in the past, to reduce US production and exploration.
Barack Obama is unsafe at any speed.
Leave a Comment
Please report any inappropriate or abusive comments to abuse@blogsforvictory.com. Please include the blog entry title and the comment number.
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