RE: Book to Reveal Obama's True Identity?
Republicans blew this one big time. After Obama spoke at the 2004 dem convention, it was obvious that republicans were going to have to deal with him at some point. They should have gotten people out on the ground digging into all this stuff then. Unfortunately, republicans were too engrossed in their visceral hatred of the Clintons to pay attention to the real problems. Before Obama became the Messiah, it would probably have been a whole lot easier to get access. There's obviously a cover up in place now. I think the birth certificate is the wrong place to look, and I think Obama is perfectly happy to have people waste time there. If it ever gets to the point that he has no alternative, I am quite certain the he will simply produce the birth certificate and it will be game, set, match Obama.
I believe Obama is at his core a socialist, if not a communist. I get that from his known history, his books, his voting record in Springfield and Washington, his personal relationships with socialists/communists, the big picture. None of these things, per se, makes him a socialist/communist. But all of them point in that direction, and little or nothing points in the other direction. My best guess is that he left a paper trail somewhere along the way that would reveal this and make him anathema to many of those centrists that he convinced to vote for him in 2008. But if you can enforce a shroud of secrecy around the birth, and the childhood time spent in Indonesia, and Occidental, and Columbia, and Harvard, then it gets a lot harder to locate the problem. It would have been easier to find things out in 2004 than in 2008.
But the republicans blew it all over the place. They elected a strong congressional majority based on an issues campaign in 1994, got sidetracked on Monicagate, and have pretty much lost their way ever since.
Karl Rove's divide and conquer strategy is designed to win every election 50.1-49.9, and with the majority of Americans with them on issues, that's not what they needed to be doing in 2000. If they'd run the campaign right, it would never have come down to hanging chad in Florida. Putting Dick Cheney on the ticket was a mistake, and keeping him there in 2004 was a bigger mistake. 2000 should have been someone that could help win some state not named Wyoming (Christine Whitman would have been my choice) and 2004 should have been about positioning a possible successor. Letting Rummy and the neocons get us into wars we didn't intend to win was another mistake. As for 2008, once McCain put his foot in his mouth on the economy and fell for TARP, it should have been obvious he had no chance against the Messiah, and republican efforts should have focused on holding a couple more senate seats. Once Ted Stevens's legal problems surfaced, it would probably have made sense to get him off the ballot--Palin would have been the obvious choice. She would not then have been able to be the VP candidate, but Pawlenty on the ticket might have pulled out a few more republicans in Minnesota and spared us Al Franken. Republicans had to know on some level that the Shrub hangover effect was going to doom their presidential ticket, and every move after 2006 should have been made with the objective of minimizing the damage in congress.
Republicans are incompetent. Worse, they're the only thing standing between us and socialism/communism. Yuck.
(This post was last modified: 04-22-2011 10:05 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
|