I’m expecting fainting and lightening and speaking in tongues..well maybe just pierced tongues at least. This will be the Leni Reifenstal Super bowl to end all political displays. Has anyone really every juxtaposed the opening scenes of “Triumph of the Will” against this Obamasiah-ism and the worshiping press coverage he’s been getting? It’s almost like they resurrected Reifenstal to cover the Obama campaign. I’m not equating Obama to Nazis, just the type of propaganda in the press coverage. Think of this when you hear people chanting “Obama! Obama!” tonight.
Anyway. I can’t wait for “Him” to appear on stage in the Parthenon. I have a tingle going up my leg.
Well my wife and I watched Triumph of the Will just before watching Barak Obama’s acceptance speech. (Again, not comparing the Dems or “the O” to Nazis, the messages are very different, just the propaganda methods and imagry used are very similar).
It was very eye opening that the same methods used to entrance the German people with a well spoken, charismatic orator such as Hitler were being used almost verbatim in some places, by Obama.
Neal Boortz points out many of the issues we saw with his economic and health care claims. If you listened to the list of things he would “cure” when in office, it surely will be heaven on earth if he gets into the White House. The truth about what he is planning will make this hell for our economy and hurt the least capable of weathering hard times in this country. Jimmy Carter v2.0 anyone?
(Excerpts below)
The Obama campaign is dedicated to the idea of chaining John McCain to George Bush. Once again last night we heard that bit about McCain voting with Bush 90% of the time. That line works because the dumb masses don’t know any better. Has it occurred to you that George Bush doesn’t have a vote in the Senate? So just how do you measure the percentage of times that McCain is voting “with” the president? Well, perhaps you could measure the number of times that a Senator votes with the Republican members. Ahhh … but remember, as our Washington correspondent Jamie Dupree has told us many times, most Senate votes are unanimous. This would mean that the only way not to “vote with the president” would be not to vote at all. As Dick Morris wrote: “The fact that McCain backs commending a basketball team on its victory doesn’t mean that he is in lockstep ideologically with the president.”
Morris also points out a series of important issues on which Bush and McCain did not agree:
McCain fought for campaign finance reform — McCain-Feingold — that Bush resisted and ultimately signed because he had no choice.
McCain led the battle to restrict interrogation techniques of terror suspects and to ban torture.
McCain went with Joe Lieberman on a tough measure to curb climate change, something Bush denies is going on.
McCain opposed the Bush tax cuts when they passed.
McCain urged the Iraq surge, a posture Bush rejected for years before conceding its wisdom.
McCain favors FDA regulation of tobacco and sponsored legislation to that effect, a position all but a handful of Republican senators oppose.
McCain’s energy bill, also with Lieberman, is a virtual blueprint for energy independence and development of alternate sources.
After the Enron scandal, McCain introduced sweeping reforms in corporate governance and legislation to guarantee pensions and prohibit golden parachutes for executives. Bush opposed McCain’s changes and the watered-down Sarbanes-Oxley bill eventuated.
McCain has been harshly critical of congressional overspending, particularly of budgetary earmarks, a position Bush only lately adopted (after the Democrats took over Congress).
Using the same methodology you would probably find that most Democrat senators also voted with Bush 90% of the time.
Now here’s one part of the Obama speech that was particularly clever. As you know, we’ve been talking about Obama’s plan to raise taxes on the very people, small businessmen and women, who are providing about 80% of the new jobs our economy is producing. Obama’s response last night was to say that “I will eliminate capital gains taxes for the small businesses and start-ups that will create the high-wage, high-tech jobs of tomorrow.”
Here, again, is where the ignorance of the American voter comes into play. I can just hear some of my listeners now: “That Neal Boortz said that Obama was going to raise taxes these small businessmen. Obama said he is going to eliminate him. There! I knew it! Boortz is a liar!”
Pay attention now. Obama said he was going to eliminate capital gains taxes. These small businessmen generally don’t pay capital gains taxes. They pay income taxes. Obama’s plan is to raise the income taxes on these entrepreneurs. Telling the American people that he will cut their capital gains taxes is simply a charade; a charade the uneducated will buy.
…
Then there’s Obama’s line about the Republicans and McCain not proposing one penny of tax relief for over 100 million Americans. Sounds good. But if you’re educated; if you know the statistics; if you pay attention you will know that the bottom 50% of income earners in this country pay only about 3% of all individual income taxes collected by the federal government. When you get to the bottom 40% that percentage figures drops to zero. Now just what is our current population figure? Around 300 million or so? That would bean that about 120 million Americans have no federal income tax liability at all. Yet there’s Obama saying that McCain is offering no tax relief to these people. Relief from what?
(end of excerpt)
It WAS an impressive showing thought. The best show Hollywood could provide. Leni Reifenstahl would have loved it, right down to the multitude of tears (men and women) after his speech.
INTEMPERATE THOUGHT:
Why was there several mentions of Obama’s father whom he stated that he only met once for a month when he was 10 years old, but not ONE mention of his step father whom his mother was married to Lolo Soetoro for several years (divorced in 1980 after separating in 1972!?) and Barack with his mother lived in the Muslim country of Indonesia for 4 years before he moved back to Hawaii without his mother to be raised by his grand parents (source).
Why was there not one single solitary reference to this part of his life or the man who was more of a father figure for his younger life than his own father (who is mentioned several times) and his grand father? By all accounts of people who knew Lolo Soetoro, he was a likable person with no real issues to be hidden.
My only guess is something that has been seen during the Obama campaign before; the intense desire to not be associated with Muslims in any way shape or form. It doesn’t poll well for him. He even was seen to have his “people” move hijabi-wearing Muslim supporters moved to the periphery of a group photo op so as to be “cropped” out of the shot or moved altogether to avoid being seen rubbing elbows with Muslims. Obama omitted his step father because it would have reminded people of his background ties to Muslims. Whether you like it or not, people have a problem with someone who appears to not want to take a stern opposition to dealing with Muslim terrorists by “talking to them without preconditions” and who has opposed the war on terror (regardless of if you disagree with how it’s being fought) from the beginning.
The stage turned out not ot be the Parthenon, it was a White House facade. Better choice by the set designer, but still a little arrogant on BO’s part. There is an air of presumption and entitlement to this position about him that makes me dislike him personally.