Psst--wanna know why Obama gets good press from people like Kagan and Kristol?

[Bicoastal]

Think about it--you a rich white neo-conservative, you've been wrong on several issues (but inexplicably still have a job), and one day--up pops a promising young black politician who many will feel may become the Democratic nominee, or possibly the President!

Now the first thing you THINK to yourself is--"WTF? Everybody knows that the Presidency is for white Anglo-Saxon Christians only..." The second thing you think to yourself is--"Holy crap! That was a racist thought, and I don't want everyone to know I'm a closet bigot!" After all, look at the shellacking Don Imus got--and you might be NEXT!

So you write a collumn and/or do an Fox News interview PRAISING Barack Obama--with several key phrases to let your readers know that, yes, you're aware he's black, and yes, you're OK with that. In fact, I haven't seen a Neo-Con glad-hand Obama yet without several positive comments about his racial heritage--it's ALWAYS in there somewhere.

Now, I'm not trying to say that anyone who speaks well of Obama is a racist--far from it. But sometimes you have to give people a second look when they go out of their WAY to praise black politicians who are their ideological opposites. In this more "sensitive" (read: mature) age, they're simply going out of their way to show you they could NEVER be racist--after all, look at the gushing pro-Obama they wrote a few months ago!

Just like when these same men hate on gay people and then turn out to be gay themselves. It's the same with racism. And as an Obama-supporter, I would love to tell these asswipes to fuck off once and for all...we don't want OR need their support!

[jlake]

1. Did you ever consider that there is no racist conspiracy, but that the neocons like

Obama because he is one of them?

[Bicoastal]

6. Let's go over this one more time...

...Obama is against the war and always has been. He has always stated his disapproval without backtracking once, and futhermore has repeatedly stressed his wishes to bring the troops home immediately.

And Hillary, and her views on Iraq...well, I don't really need to remind you, do I?

He's NOT a Neocon as I understand it.

[jlake]

15. He backtracked in 2004 when he said he did not know how he would have voted.

And since joining the senate his votes are identical to Hillary's.
The problem is that he and his supporters are not honest about his positions.....

[NYCGirl]

19. No backtrack — it was to support Kerry/Edwards:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lN30M6StFfk

[jlake]

21. LOL it was certainly a backtrack. If you want to justify it - fine, but to say that

he has "been against it from the start and never waivered" is NOT True.....he cannot claim that.....try again.

[NYCGirl]

25. I guess you don't know what being a good Democrat is. But Hillary Clinton

did stab Kerry in the back about the "joke."

[jlake]

28. Being a good Democrat is not the issue.... If Obama's story is the truth, then

he made a sacrifice......and he does not have the right to claim he NEVER WAIVERED on his support....because HE DID, even if for good reasons.

[Tweety]

7. How the HELL can Obama be a neo-con.

Neo-cons are Republican stalwarts. Obama does not share their militarist
ideas. :wtf:

The neo-cons are afraid of him. They want him to lose the primary so they can win in the fall.

[jlake]

10. Um, have you read his plans? We wants to dramatically increase defense

spending......now why would someone want to do that? Hmmm... a real head-scratcher.

[Tweety]

13. Proof?

:eyes:

Let's see it!

[jlake]

17. Okay.....here it is from barackobama.com

"Building a 21st Century Military
The Problem: The excellence of our military is unmatched. But as a result of a misguided war in Iraq, our forces are under pressure as never before. Obama will make the investments we need so that the finest military in the world is best-prepared to meet 21st-century threats.
Rebuild Trust: Obama will rebuild trust with those who serve by ensuring that soldiers and Marines have sufficient training time before they are sent into battle.
Expand the Military: We have learned from Iraq that our military needs more men and women in uniform to reduce the strain on our active force. Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines.
New Capabilities: Obama will give our troops new equipment, armor, training, and skills like language training. He will also strengthen our civilian capacity, so that our civilian agencies have the critical skills and equipment they need to integrate their efforts with our military.
Strengthen Guard and Reserve: Obama will restore the readiness of the National Guard and Reserves. He will permit them adequate time to train and rest between deployments, and provide the National Guard with the equipment they need for foreign and domestic emergencies. He will also give the Guard a seat at the table by making the Chief of the National Guard a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff"

[NYCGirl]

22. Those sound like really good ideas to me. Did you miss the part about the

"misguided war in Iraq"?

[jlake]

26. No, I was talking to another poster who claimed Obama did not have

plans to expand the military....which he does.
I did not say that everything Obama says is wrong.

[RaleighNCDUer]

40. That's not "expanding". It's just fixing what Bush broke. nt

[jlake]

41. Why do we need 50K new troops if we are not going to be at war?

[Seen the light]

9. bwahahahaha!

That's coming from a Clinton supporter? Priceless!

[jlake]

12. They why do the neocons not support Clinton?

[Seen the light]

14. The ones that are on DU most certainly do

Just like jla....oh sorry, what was I saying? :D

Just kidding of course.

[jlake]

20. Try again.

[Seen the light]

24. How's that war in Iraq working out for ya? nt

[jlake]

29. I *WAS* Against it from the beginning -- and I am disappointed in everyone who

voted to authorize it.... but that is history. I now look for the best plan to end the war and NOT start MORE. .... and since I believe Obama would have voted Yes had he been in the senate, he has absolutely no advantage over the other candidates.

[Seen the light]

33. I disagree

He would have voted no. He said he would have voted no.

Yes, he has had some questionable votes on things like the PATRIOT Act, but I take him at his word and, going by some of the powerful things he has said on Iraq, he would have made the principled decision. Unlike what Clinton and even DU's sudden hero John Edwards did.

[bellasgrams]

34. Obana had the chance to say he would have voted against

the war, but that's not what he said.

[Seen the light]

35. Going by his 2002 speech and what followed in the comment I'm sure you're referring to

"What I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made"--That part that immediately follows him saying that he didn't know how he would vote.

He would have voted against it. If the case hadn't been made, then why would he have voted for it?

[jlake]

37. I do not share the same confidence in him. At. all.

[Clarkansas]

31. And you have a Clinton avatar! OMG!

Clinton: the only true progressive!
:eyes:

[jlake]

38. I know where she stands. and what she does.

Obama is all talk....
And Edwards....when he actually had a chance to do something was a rubber stamp for Bush... and his new schtick is insincere.

[Clarkansas]

42. I know where Bush stands too (not too far from Clinton on plenty of issues)

but that isn't a good reason to vote for him.

Good luck in achieving the Clinton/Nader/Bloomberg/Republican race you want so badly, but count me out.

[Nye Bevan]

36. Yeah. Obama will bomb Iran for sure.

:eyes:

[jlake]

39. I am glad you are so confident. What has he said to gain your belief?

[Didereaux]

44. Rove, Kristol et al publicly praise Obama for one reason ONLY...

It makes it appear that in reality he is the one they fear most...therefor the stupid will conclude that Obama is the strongest candidate. Being soles, and not prone to deep thoghts or even shallow ones, they do precisely what Rove has intended, to put in place the opposition candidate that he thinks is the weakest one the opposition will be apt to choose.

OHHHHH! Karl Rove doesn't control ME! yeah right. That fat ugly bastard didn't get where he is, nor what he acheived by being stupid. His sole weakness is that he believes that there can never be change in the human condition, i.e. that the psychology of the species is fixed...he is right, but it is a wider range than he apparently thinks(if I am wrong then the Kiddy Army will get their lessons about cause and effect first hand at theri and our expense.

But to restate: ANY candidate that the Repugs even remotely praise is who they think is the weakest. When that candidate appears to have a lock, they will then turn and ATTACK viciously the same candidate. Why? To solidify the candidates stupis core, AND to get the lies firmly in the minds of the electorate who up to that point have little or no attention to the matter of politics.

Bookmark this, save it, what ever I will gladly eat two crow pies and apply a dozen eggs to my face if what I said is wrong! Anyone care to offer to do the same if they oppose and I am right?

[Naturyl]

2. Yeah, you might be onto something.

It sounds consistent with what I know of psychology.

[Tweety]

3. You could just ignore them.

Kristol is known for extremist views.

Why does he matter? He doesn't!

[Octafish]

16. Hi, Tweety! Kristol matters because he is a major PNAC turd.

You know, the "New 'Perle' Harbor" types.

They're huge. They're everywhere. They're in places they shouldn't be.

[readmoreoften]

4. They support Obama because his foreign policy relates to their ideas.

Kagan's words:

Actually, Obama wants to increase defense spending. He wants to add 65,000 troops to the Army and recruit 27,000 more Marines. Why? To fight terrorism.

He wants the American military to "stay on the offense, from Djibouti to Kandahar," and he believes that "the ability to put boots on the ground will be critical in eliminating the shadowy terrorist networks we now face." He wants to ensure that we continue to have "the strongest, best-equipped military in the world."

Obama never once says that military force should be used only as a last resort. Rather, he insists that "no president should ever hesitate to use force -- unilaterally if necessary," not only "to protect ourselves . . . when we are attacked," but also to protect "our vital interests" when they are "imminently threatened." That's known as preemptive military action. It won't reassure those around the world who worry about letting an American president decide what a "vital interest" is and when it is "imminently threatened."

Nor will they be comforted to hear that "when we use force in situations other than self-defense, we should make every effort to garner the clear support and participation of others." Make every effort? Conspicuously absent from Obama's discussion of the use of force are four words: United Nations Security Council.

[jlake]

8. Ding Ding Ding We have a winner.

[avaistheone1]

11. Unfortunately, that is what I understand too.

Doesn't Obama want to send troops to Pakistan?

[indimuse]

18. and..

Reviewing the speech, Ha'aretz Washington correspondent Shmuel Rosner concluded that Obama "sounded as strong as Clinton, as supportive as Bush, as friendly as Giuliani. At least rhetorically, Obama passed any test anyone might have wanted him to pass. So, he is pro-Israel. Period."

Israel is "our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy," Obama said, assuring his audience that "we must preserve our total commitment to our unique defense relationship with Israel by fully funding military assistance and continuing work on the Arrow and related missile defense programs." Such advanced multi-billion dollar systems he asserted, would help Israel "deter missile attacks from as far as Tehran and as close as Gaza." As if the starved, besieged and traumatized population of Gaza are about to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Obama offered not a single word of criticism of Israel, of its relentless settlement and wall construction, of the closures that make life unlivable for millions of Palestinians.




Obama voted for President Bush's energy bill,increasing hardship for families!


lil'quack quack...

[leftchick]

23. Hillary does too

they both have neocon mideast policies.

[sandnsea]

30. Well Kagan is delusional

Because this is not remotely what Obama means when he talks about going after terrorists. And once again, ALL the candidates support increasing troops for terrorism purposes. Except Kucinich.

He advocates UN involvement all the time, on every international issue.

http://www.cfr.org/bios/11603/barack_obama.html

[DB1]

5. Kristol clear to me.. keep your friends close and your enemies closer !

[Swamp Rat]

27. Karl Rove was nice enough to remind us Barack Obama played basketball... wink wink.

"His trash talking was an unattractive carryover from his days playing pickup basketball at Harvard, and capped a mediocre night."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119992615845679531.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

[scarletwoman]

32. Because they are completely confident that he won't rock their boat.

If you think there's any other reason, you are seriously delusional about how the power structure in this country operates.

sw

[opihimoimoi]

43. Ya just know if Billy Kristol backs Obama...there is something smelly

It appears he is Plunking....backing someone on our side so they can vote Pub in the Gen...Smells like a Rove Plan