Thursday, July 24, 2008

Why Do Some Clinton Supporters Want To Derail Obama?

Original Link:

By Ani

Oh, Jack, you grumpy fossil, still up to your old tricks. Why should we bother to respond to this question knowing you’ll never bother to report the correct answer.

The better question is, why does Jack Cafferty still act clueless when he surely has a college education? Is common sense optional at CNN?

The drive by hit squad media can resist no opportunity to treat Hillary Clinton or her 18,000,000 voters dismissively and disrespectfully. Jack, your latest piece is no exception.

But since you asked, we have a problem voting for Obama, the newbie Senator from Illinois, when Senator Clinton is ten times more qualified. We do not like, trust or believe in him. The country is in too much of a mess to hand it over to a disingenuous flip-flopper.

What he lacks in experience he more than compensates for in arrogance — a dangerous combination we have endured eight years of with George Bush to devastating result. Can you blame us for not wanting to relive the experience with the ‘Democratic’ version of the same. Although now, Obama is acting more and more like a Republican, reversing his positions on FISA, public financing, gun control, women’s rights, the death penalty, Iraq withdrawal, the Iran threat, Israel and more.

Are you really trying to tell us we should just blindly vote for someone who behaves this way simply because he has a (D) after his name?

Here’s one of your viewer’s on air comments:

Clinton supporters and others who are trying to derail Senator Obama are unhappy with their own lives. Mr. Obama is confident, intelligent, and knows how to galvanize the population.

We are quite happy with our lives, I can assure you. What we are afraid of is that his inexperience, his cluelessness on foreign policy, his fondness for Reaganomics, his capitulations on important issues and all around whiffle-waffling will give us reasons to be unhappy.

Actually, as to the viewer’s comments above, I think the reverse is true. A wise friend correctly pointed out that many of Senator Obama’s supporters are looking for something outside themselves to complete them or solve their problems. They think he is the answer, although they have no logic for their reasoning.

I have yet to hear anyone make a cogent argument to me for supporting him that has anything to do with his qualifications or his true policies. As I believe Wes Clark, of all people, said months ago while campaigning with Hillary in Texas: “We are not electing student council president here.”

Once, at a church service, I remember the Reverend saying, ‘be involved, not enthralled.’ Truly, I feel compassion for those enthralled to this false messiah because I have learned the long way that the romance of the thing is very different from the reality of the thing.

As to your thesis that PUMA members wish to derail Obama, I posit: Do we need to?

He is doing a bang up job of derailing himself.

Obama has a huge financial advantage, and the press swooning over him like high school cheerleaders. If he is so able to “galvanize the population,” why is he still in a dead heat with a 71 year old Republican without much of a platform? In a year when the Republican brand should be all but demolished…

This should tell you that we are not the folks who are derailing Obama. PUMA is not the problem. We are only a few bitter voters, after all, who should take a chill pill according to you. The problem is that many Americans are awakening from the kool-aid induced stupor of his lovely speeches and they are starting to notice that the media is thoroughly in the tank for him.

Contrary to your statement, Barack Obama did not ‘win. No one ‘won.’ Neither Senators Clinton nor Obama have enough pledged delegates to reach the nomination. Super Delegates can ‘pledge’ whatever they want now. Those pledges mean nothing until they vote at the Convention. Jack – surely you know this. Why do you pretend otherwise?

In another sign of political shortsightedness, Senator Obama has not made any efforts to reach out to the many voters that he and his campaign insulted throughout the primary. Instead, he has dismissively instructed us to “get over it”. Six weeks after the fact, this has not changed. So who is it that is “cutting off their nose to spite their face?”

Jack: throughout this primary, you have behaved just as rudely toward Senator Clinton as the worst of Obama’s college-aged paid bloggers, who have called Hillary and her voters every filthy name in the book.

You and they might be wise to reflect that such behavior is a very big reason we do not wish to support him. If this is the unity, hope and change such a person inspires — we want no part of it.

No comments: