Liberalscum Buster

October 27, 2008

McCain lacks the character and temperament to be president. And Palin is simply a disgrace.

Filed under: BARACK OBAMA, Bush, hillary clinton, John McCain, life, mideast, news, politics, war — gasdocpol @ 4:02 pm

Vote for Obama

By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, Oct. 13, 2008, at 10:44 AM ET

Barack ObamaI used to nod wisely when people said: “Let’s discuss issues rather than personalities.” It seemed so obvious that in politics an issue was an issue and a personality was a personality, and that the more one could separate the two, the more serious one was. After all, in a debate on serious issues, any mention of the opponent’s personality would be ad hominem at best and at worst would stoop as low as ad feminam.

At my old English boarding school, we had a sporting saying that one should “tackle the ball and not the man.” I carried on echoing this sort of unexamined nonsense for quite some time—in fact, until the New Hampshire primary of 1992, when it hit me very forcibly that the “personality” of one of the candidates was itself an “issue.” In later years, I had little cause to revise my view that Bill Clinton’s abysmal character was such as to be a “game changer” in itself, at least as important as his claim to be a “new Democrat.” To summarize what little I learned from all this: A candidate may well change his or her position on, say, universal health care or Bosnia. But he or she cannot change the fact—if it happens to be a fact—that he or she is a pathological liar, or a dimwit, or a proud ignoramus. And even in the short run, this must and will tell.

On “the issues” in these closing weeks, there really isn’t a very sharp or highly noticeable distinction to be made between the two nominees, and their “debates” have been cramped and boring affairs as a result. But the difference in character and temperament has become plainer by the day, and there is no decent way of avoiding the fact. Last week’s so-called town-hall event showed Sen. John McCain to be someone suffering from an increasingly obvious and embarrassing deficit, both cognitive and physical. And the only public events that have so far featured his absurd choice of running mate have shown her to be a deceiving and unscrupulous woman utterly unversed in any of the needful political discourses but easily trained to utter preposterous lies and to appeal to the basest element of her audience. McCain occasionally remembers to stress matters like honor and to disown innuendoes and slanders, but this only makes him look both more senile and more cynical, since it cannot (can it?) be other than his wish and design that he has engaged a deputy who does the innuendoes and slanders for him.

Share this article on DiggBuzz up!Share this article on BuzzI suppose it could be said, as Michael Gerson has alleged, that the Obama campaign’s choice of the word erratic to describe McCain is also an insinuation. But really, it’s only a euphemism. Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear had to feel sorry for the old lion on his last outing and wish that he could be taken somewhere soothing and restful before the night was out. The train-wreck sentences, the whistlings in the pipes, the alarming and bewildered handhold phrases—”My friends”—to get him through the next 10 seconds. I haven’t felt such pity for anyone since the late Adm. James Stockdale humiliated himself as Ross Perot’s running mate. And I am sorry to have to say it, but Stockdale had also distinguished himself in America’s most disastrous and shameful war, and it didn’t qualify him then and it doesn’t qualify McCain now.

The most insulting thing that a politician can do is to compel you to ask yourself: “What does he take me for?” Precisely this question is provoked by the selection of Gov. Sarah Palin. I wrote not long ago that it was not right to condescend to her just because of her provincial roots or her piety, let alone her slight flirtatiousness, but really her conduct since then has been a national disgrace. It turns out that none of her early claims to political courage was founded in fact, and it further turns out that some of the untested rumors about her—her vindictiveness in local quarrels, her bizarre religious and political affiliations—were very well-founded, indeed. Moreover, given the nasty and lowly task of stirring up the whack-job fringe of the party’s right wing and of recycling patent falsehoods about Obama’s position on Afghanistan, she has drawn upon the only talent that she apparently possesses.

It therefore seems to me that the Republican Party has invited not just defeat but discredit this year, and that both its nominees for the highest offices in the land should be decisively repudiated, along with any senators, congressmen, and governors who endorse them.

I used to call myself a single-issue voter on the essential question of defending civilization against its terrorist enemies and their totalitarian protectors, and on that “issue” I hope I can continue to expose and oppose any ambiguity. Obama is greatly overrated in my opinion, but the Obama-Biden ticket is not a capitulationist one, even if it does accept the support of the surrender faction, and it does show some signs of being able and willing to profit from experience. With McCain, the “experience” is subject to sharply diminishing returns, as is the rest of him, and with Palin the very word itself is a sick joke. One only wishes that the election could be over now and a proper and dignified verdict rendered, so as to spare democracy and civility the degradation to which they look like being subjected in the remaining days of a low, dishonest campaign.

Advertisements

7 Comments »

  1. Below is an important issue to be discussed:

    If Obama says that he is a Christian he is telling you that he follows Christ. Christ is Lord and He condemns much of what Obama stands for including homosexuality and abortion. Obama is a HERETIC. In a pure sense, Obama is by definition, an antiChrist (not necessarily THE ANTICHRIST). Obama is an advocate for abortion. Obama is therefore, in a pure sense, for murder of children. Obama is also an advocate of homosexuality. Obama is therefore, in a pure sense, for the promotion of homosexuality. “For there will rise up false Christs and false prophets…” MARK 13:22. If you cast your vote for Obama, you are, in a pure sense, for murder of children and in a pure sense, promoting homosexuality. You are then, ALSO, LIABLE for THOSE SINS.

    Please Note:

    “WHO HAVING KNOWN THE JUSTICE OF GOD, DID NOT UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WHO DO SUCH THINGS ARE WORTHY OF DEATH; AND NOT ONLY THOSE THAT DO THEM, BUT THEY ALSO THAT CONSENT TO THEM THAT DO THEM.” ROM 1:32

    Not death on earth…

    Comment by josephudo — October 27, 2008 @ 4:22 pm

  2. Christopher Hitchens is a left-wing loon. Palin a disgrace? Hardly, she has rallied the base because of her strong character. I guess not “killing” Trigg is why she is so disgraceful to these radicals.

    McCain has far more character than this twit, and he hasn’t shown anything but class in keeping his campaign “honest” and his message clear. I guess him being “old and senile” is enough for a partisan hack like this to write him off.

    Hitchens shows with this article that he is a disgrace, lacking the character and temperament to write a fair and balanced piece…

    http://clancop.wordpress.com

    Comment by clancop — October 27, 2008 @ 4:36 pm

  3. Left wing loon?
    Wikipedia says
    Hitchens is a polemicist and intellectual. While he was once identified with the Anglo-American radical political left, he has more recently embraced some arguably right-wing causes, notably the Iraq War; the war has had the support of some liberal commentators of Hitchens’ acquaintance in the UK and Canada.

    It seems to me that Hitchens is pretty open minded.

    Comment by gasdocpol — October 27, 2008 @ 4:43 pm

  4. “The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.
    $30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
    $540 billion: Annual U.S. Defense Budget.”

    Comment by theborgenproject — October 27, 2008 @ 5:51 pm

  5. For josephudo- Actually the bible states that you will be judged by your works. I could argue the Christian values just as well by stating that Democrats are better at taking care of the poor and that Matthew 25, 34-43 commands us to take care of the poor or else we will be cast into everlasting fire. Its very clear. But the true point is that both of us would be wrong to vote based on this. Our government doesn’t exist to serve your agenda or my agenda. The government was set forth to provide the freedom of religion, so that you can continue to practice your beliefs (no matter how wacko they might be), and I can continue to support my own wacko beliefs. I believe that the democratic party holds christian values better, but it really doesn’t matter. We should be voting to try to continue to provide freedom of religion, not to try to suppress any portion of the population. We should vote for freedom for everyone, not for the purposes of suppressing homosexuals or any other segment of the population. I’m a straight white christian male, but I’m smart enough to realize that no vote will make gay people go away, and that the purpose of this great nation was not to serve any one single person’s beliefs, but to provide the freedoms that allows all of us to exist under one roof and seek liberty and happiness.

    Comment by Eric — October 27, 2008 @ 6:08 pm

  6. http://www.matthew25.org/

    Comment by Eric — October 27, 2008 @ 6:22 pm

  7. Just like Christopher Buckley? Conservatives wouldn’t consider him one of their own. Just because you say it, doesn’t make it true, same with Wikipedia. No scholar, especially on a University campus, would allow you to use that as a credible source. I will say though that you completely downplay the “radically politically left” reference. You don’t change those “spots” overnight.

    Open-minded doesn’t mean much, especially coming from someone who thinks that hit job is a meaningful piece of journalism.

    http://clancop.wordpress.com

    Comment by clancop — October 27, 2008 @ 6:29 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: