2007

Today’s Tosser

ArchPundit January 18, 2007 4 Comments

Fran Eaton

More angry letters are coming into The Star for the columns (Dec 31 and Jan 14) I’ve been writing about Barack Obama’s Chicago Southside church and his controversial pastor/spiritual advisor.

Yesterday I published on IR a letter I received from an Obama fan that called me “Satan” and “a dog” for questioning the black supremacy teachings at Obama’s church.

And yet, no black supremacy teaching has been identified at Obama’s church. Eaton has tried to claim that Afrocentrist Christianity is some sort of ideology of supremacy, but it is the concept that Western historical perspectives shouldn’t be used alone to understand history. That’s hardly a supremacist view–it’s more like a rounded view of history.

Someone Tell Roeser about Snopes

ArchPundit January 17, 2007 5 Comments

It’s really hard to tell how this idiot ever was given any public credence, but he has four questions to Barack Obama:

Barack Obama can end the controversy as well. His office seems to regard any questions of a possible earlier religious commitment as unfair. Not so. If he can answer the question as completely as Kennedy did, he deserves to move up to the next level.

Question No. 1: When you were a youth, you went to a Muslim school for several years. Did you ever embrace the Muslim faith then and later renounce it?

Question No. 2: Do Muslims have any reason to believe that you were once of their faith and have rejected it?

Question No. 3: Was there ever a time when people would have reason to believe you were a Muslim? The fact that Hussein is your middle name is one reason-the name of Mohammad’s grandson whose date of death is regarded as a high holy day in the Muslim faith.

Question No. 4: Do you realize that the Koran specifies that anyone who was a member of the Muslim faith and rejected should be done away with?

The famous internets has already dealt with the issue--as has Obama

Barack Obama’s father (also named Barack Obama) departed Hawaii, leaving his wife and son behind, when young Barack was only two years old. Four years later Barack’s mother, Anna, remarried (to an Indonesian oil company manager), and she and Barack moved to Djakarta, the capital and largest city of Indonesia. In his 1995 memoir, Dreams from My Father, Obama did not provide any detail about the schools he attended in Indonesia, saying only that:

[My mother’s] initial efforts centered on education. Without the money to send me to the International School, where most of Djakarta’s foreign children went, she had arranged from the moment of our arrival to supplement my Indonesian schooling with lessons from a U.S. correspondence course.

Five days a week, she came into my room at four in the morning, force-fed me breakfast, and proceeded to teach me my English lessons for three hours before I left for school and she went to work.

In his 2006 book, The Audacity of Hope, Obama elaborated on his early schooling, explaining that he attended both Catholic and Muslim schools in Indonesia; not out of any particular religious affiliation, but because his mother wanted him to obtain the best education possible under the circumstances:

During the five years that we would live with my stepfather in Indonesia, I was sent first to a neighborhood Catholic school and then to a predominantly Muslim school; in both cases, my mother was less concerned with me learning the catechism or puzzling out the meaning of the muezzin’s call to evening prayer than she was with whether I was properly learning my multiplication tables.

Confusingly, a 2004 Salon profile of Obama reverses the order in which he attended those schools:

When Obama was 6, Anna remarried. Her new husband was Lolo, an Indonesian oil company manager, and the new family moved to Djakarta, where Obama’s sister Maya was born.

After two years in a Muslim school, then two more in a Catholic school, Obama was sent by his mother back to her parents’ home so that he could attend Hawaii’s esteemed Punahou Academy

So the reason Obama’s office thinks the questions are unfair is because there are only so many ways you can answer the same questions over and over again.

Daily Dolt

ArchPundit January 17, 2007 No Comments

Rush Limbaugh!

Obama is a half-minority. Because when racial discrimination occurs people check your percentage of white lineage before deciding how much to discriminate against you.

It’s Kind of What We’ve Been Asking For….

ArchPundit January 17, 2007 1 Comment

Duncan made a good point the other day about Obama’s statement about the war:

The basic content of what Obama is saying, divorced from the larger debate, is fine, but as to how it plays in the current debate it’s not fine. It allows us to wait around one more Friedman… and then something will happen. Except it won’t happen. Troops will not start coming home 4-6 months from now. And, most likely, 4-6 months from now Obama won’t be saying “bring them home now,” though I’ve put him on my little calendar and will make sure to check back then and let you know.

The thing is that “bring them home now” doesn’t really mean now. It doesn’t mean that thousands of troops start boarding transport planes for the trip home. It just means that the focus shifts from staying to leaving, and the latter slowly begins to happen. Every time someone punts that action for yet another Friedman, it helps to ensure that the end of the war will always be a Friedman away.

I agreed with Duncan at the time even though I’m very sympathetic to what Obama is saying. Ultimately, Duncan was right though. Discussing Iraq in terms of how pony plans doesn’t work no matter how well intentioned and serious the idea. If George Bush believes all that is happening is that people are going to offer alternative plans he’ll keep sending troops to Iraq like a gambling addict chasing his losses.

The thing is, here’s Duncan today:

I suppose it’s progress that major Democrats are trying to one-up each other on legislation-about-Iraq-that-won’t pass. Still, now that they have a majority and seem to generally agree that ending the war is the right thing to do I’d prefer it if they got into a room and found something they could all get behind which would be an attempt to end this thing.

I do think Democrats (ones in office more than the 60s-scarred punditry) are at least understanding that this war is unpopular and there will be no backlash against them for attempts to end it.

Someone running for President and getting the message that there has to be a loud and unambiguous message to Bush that it’s time to get out, has to and should do exactly what Obama is doing. Yeah, it’s more symbolism than substance in one sense, but it turns the debate exactly as Duncan wanted to one of getting the fuck out. Obama and everyone besides Joe Biden will be able to still work together on mutually agreed upon plans after this, but the loud and clear call isn’t a bad thing.

So Obama’s doing what we wanted him to do and actually I think Duncan is doing exactly what he was previously annoyed with Obama doing which was to avoid the limelight and work with everyone on a plan in the Senate to get this over with. Duncan has good points in both cases, but I think we need to realize Obama’s statement is

a) a reflection of what he’s come to realize

and

b) exactly what Duncan (and I) were asking for essentially.

It’s the Only Way to Wake Bush Up

ArchPundit January 17, 2007 1 Comment

Obama Statement on Iraq

“Throughout the war in Iraq, we have been given assurance after assurance by our government only to find out that facts on the ground reflect a completely different reality.

“Last week, after being told by President Bush that his plan to escalate this war would be well-planned, well-coordinated, and well-supported by the Iraqi government, we find out in this week’s New York Times that none of this is true. Military officials tell us that there is no clear chain of command between Iraqis and U.S. commanders and no real indication that the Iraqis even want such a partnership.

“I cannot in good conscience support this plan. As I first said two months ago, we should not be sending more U.S. troops to Iraq, we should begin redeploying them to let the Iraqis know that we will not be there forever and to pressure the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds to finally reach a political settlement.

“Escalation is a failed policy opposed by generals, Democrats and Republicans, and now even the Iraqis themselves, and the fact that the President is already moving ahead with this idea is a terrible consequence of the decision to give him the broad, open-ended authority to wage this war in 2002.

“It now falls on Congress to find a way to support our troops in the field while still preventing the President from multiplying his previous mistakes. That is why I not only favor capping the number U.S. troops in Iraq, but believe it’s imperative that we begin the phased redeployment I called for two months ago, and intend to introduce legislation that does just that.”