I love it when Stephen Colbert humorously casts light on a serious topic. That makes all the hours I spend watching The Colbert Report, rather than, say, reading the New York Times, seem a lot more productive.
Recently Colbert had a great riff on Hillary Clinton’s claim that she should get the superdelegate vote because she’s more electable – having won the big important states that are crucial to winning the presidency.
Here’s some of his right-on observations, as I recollect them (maybe mixed in with my own notions):
–Clinton says she can win the presidency because she won California, New York, and Ohio. But McCain also won those states. So doesn’t this mean that both Clinton and McCain are going to be elected president?
–Clinton is all proud that she won a few big states, while Obama has won many small states. Yet if you mashed the many small states Obama has won into a few big states, wouldn’t this come out to be the same thing?
–Clinton claims that she’s electable because she won in Democratic strongholds like California and New York. But if these are really “strongholds,” won’t any Democratic candidate win those states? Like, Obama.
Obama’s blog does a more refined job of taking on Hillary’s arguments in “Debunking the Clinton Campaign’s Dubious ‘Big State’ Spin.”
And my new favorite web site, Pollster.com, shows how Clinton and Obama currently fare against McCain in some big states that supposedly are Hillary country.
Pennsylvania: Clinton 44%, McCain 44%; Obama 41%, McCain 42%. Basically no difference.
Ohio: Clinton 45%, McCain 44%; Obama 45%, McCain 44%. Absolutely no difference.
Lastly, nationally: Clinton 46%, McCain 46%; Obama 46%, McCain 44%. Slight tilt toward Obama.
Discover more from Hinessight
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I just want to know who is going to pay for all the big government favored by Clinton and Obama. Probably me and my heirs. Gonna have to stash my loot under a different mattress.
I think Ferraro was right. Obama has gotten as far as he has because he is black. Nothing special comes out of his mouth but glib rhetoric heard time and again from whites, but being black makes it special. Oh, wouldn’t it be cool to elect this charming black man? We’ll feel so egalitarian and righteous and prove once and for all we’re not racist anymore. Now isn’t that a good reason to put someone in the White House? So what if we can’t afford what he proposes.
What I’d like to know is who is going to pay the debt accumulated under these years of more conservative republican leadership whereby debt became a virtue instead of a burden. I hear mcCain talk about giving back more money to the people. So does that mean the Chinese have forgiven our debt to them? I have never heard of conservative philosophy all about borrowing borrowing and spending spending. Maybe in new dictionaries the definition has changed?
Rain said–“What I’d like to know is who is going to pay the debt accumulated under these years of more conservative republican leadership”
..The Bush administration is a poor example of conservative leadership. This is not a failure of conservatism. It is a failure of the Bush administration, congress, and special interests going hand in hand merrily down the path of short-sightedness, poor planning and bungling. If you buy a bag of peanuts and a couple of them are rotten, does this mean all peanuts are bad? Do you think someone who tells you up front (Obama-Clinton) that they are going to expand government is going to reduce the debt?
Rain said: “I hear mcCain talk about giving back more money to the people.”
..McCain is not a conservative. He is what would be called a democrat 30-40 years ago.
Rain said–“So does that mean the Chinese have forgiven our debt to them?”
Do you think they will forgive the debt with Obama-Clinton in office spending tax money on bigger beaurocracy and attempting to provide free health care to 320 million people? What is your point? The Chinese will own our debt no matter who is in office.
Rain said–“I have never heard of conservative philosophy all about borrowing borrowing and spending spending. Maybe in new dictionaries the definition has changed?”
..Again, there isn’t a conservative pony in the race, and you can be sure spending won’t diminish with Obama-Clinton. Probably not with McCain either.
There is, understandably, an “anyone but Bush” mentality. Clinton-Obama isn’t Bush, but neither is McCain. Attention!! Republicans are not Bush. Only Bush is Bush and he’s on the way out.
Obama will be revealed for what he is..a lightweight. Not that he’s stupid. He’s smart, but he’s not up to speed on foreign policy. He’d better be doing his homework and at the same time find a way to shovel his fanatic pastor under a thick rug. To be associated with a complete fool like that shows very poor judgement on Obama’s part and makes you wonder what Obama’s really about if he can follow a hate-monger. Obama was married by this guy who says the government planned 911 and created Aids to kill off minorities. Come on.
Obama renounced those beliefs. Did McCain or Bush renounce those of the Christian nutcases they have accepted support from? Obama isn’t likely to get the nomination anyway as Republicans like rush Limbaugh are urging their supporters to cross lines to have Hillary to run against McCain. Do they think she’s truly the best or as Rush says– easiest to beat. They might get a surprise and find she’s the one President next time this year. Now that is a really scary thought and any Republican who votes for her thinking she is easy to beat deserves just what they get– which is probably the logic they used when they supported Bush through all these travesties.
Rain said–“Obama renounced those beliefs. Did McCain or Bush renounce those of the Christian nutcases they have accepted support from?”
..Obama had to renounce those beliefs or he would have been finished. You CAN control who you directly associate with. Obama chose to associate with this anti-american pastor until he was exposed. This is troubling and possibly revealing in the light of his wife’s statement a few weeks back when she said that her husband’s successful candidacy was the first time in her life she was proud of her country.
Bush, McCain, Edwards, Clinton, or anyone, CAN’T control the fanatical personal ideology of everyone who supports them. Do you see the difference? Can the Yankees baseball team control their fans’ personal beliefs and behavior? If they have some crazy fans does that make them a bad baseball team?
Obama attended a church where he said that this pastor did not speak those words while he was there. Did he know the pastor believed them? Possibly. The pastor’s beliefs though were no different than people like Robertson or Falwell who gave their support to many republicans. It’s that warped way of thinking that god will bring a hurricane onto a city in payback for sin elsewhere. A lot of Christians buy into that thinking. Possibly even McCain.
I don’t expect to have a presidential candidate who I totally like everything they say or believe. In my 64 years, I have yet to have one. I haven’t been thrilled to hear Obama’s Christian rhetoric before. I am not very impressed with religion and what it does to common sense, but in this case, you have three potential candidates. Pie in the sky candidates aren’t in there– if they ever were. So it’s who do you prefer of the three most likely to get it, and I prefer Obama– whether he had a pastor who thought that our country made mistakes in the Middle East, had bases in countries that drove the Arab fanatics to attack us or not. Since I am not gung-ho on religion and all likely presidential candidates are religious, I will never be thrilled with my choices. I choose the best I can and this time if it ends up McCain and Clinton, I will write in a name and it won’t be Obama’s.
I always vote but won’t vote for someone ‘I’ believe is damaging to this country. We all as individuals do our best with our vote. My bet is many of those who voted for Bush, some of who still support him, didn’t begin to imagine the damage he’d do and may yet do. So sometimes people vote and make a mistake. Personally I think Obama is our best chance to avoid that and have written why I think that in my own blog extensively. You are certainly privileged to disagree and vote how you believe is best. That’s all any of us can do.
Rain said: “Possibly even McCain.”
–Possibly, yes, but we KNOW Obama willingly associated with an extremist. It is unlikely this pastor suddenly formed his views overnight and Obama just found out about them recently.
Rain said: “The pastor’s beliefs though were no different than people like Robertson or Falwell who gave their support to many republicans.”
..But that doesn’t mean the republican candidate shares the views of their supporters who happen to be fanatics.
Because of direct association, one wonders if Obama might share his pastor’s views. If Robertson gives his support to McCain, there is no reason to believe that McCain also thinks Katrina was God’s punishment for the sins of New Orleans.
If you run for mayor and someone who votes for you thinks hampsters are dogs, that doesn’t mean you think hampsters are dogs. But if you were to hang out at the “Hampsters are Dogs Club”, then it would be reasonable to suspect that you think hampsters are dogs.
Rain said: “he had a pastor who thought that our country made mistakes in the Middle East, had bases in countries that drove the Arab fanatics to attack us or not.”
..If that was all the pastor said, there wouldn’t be this controversy. It went a lot farther than that. The pastor said the US government planned the 911 attacks. He said the US government created AIDS to wipe out blacks and eliminate minority problems. This is irrational thinking and reflects poorly on Obama (and his wife) who looked to a man with this sort of mentality for spiritual guidance.
So no problem for you in this. Don’t vote for him. I thought Bush was an idiot but it didn’t stop others from voting for him. Freedom of vote and all that. You may think I am wrong but I intend to vote for Obama. I have had a lot of pastors over the years and often like them fine as people but don’t agree with their political or religious viewpoints. Are you one of those who secretly think Obama’s a Muslim extremist? Have you been getting those weird emails about him? I have said my piece here and won’t be writing more about it. Obama might be a total liar like Bush turned out to be. He might be telling the truth on his take on this. You get to vote and so do I. Obviously I won’t be changing your mind and you sure won’t be changing mine. I am going by what Obama has written and said. Given my life experience, I do understand how you respect the man who baptized your children even if as he gets older he has said some weird things. McCain has a supporter who says Christianity has a responsibility to destroy Islam. Your choices are McCain, Clinton or Obama. As for me, I believe what I believe about Obama and won’t be changing your mind by writing anymore on it here.
“I have had a lot of pastors over the years and often like them fine as people but don’t agree with their political or religious viewpoints.”
–Yes, I understand, but this pastor spews such venom that I don’t see how a reasonable, intelligent person that Obama appears to be would associate with such a person. This just makes me wonder what kind of people Obama will surround himself with if he were to become president.
“Are you one of those who secretly think Obama’s a Muslim extremist? Have you been getting those weird emails about him?”
–No to both.