This is from the cover of the current issue of the New Yorker.
And a funny response:
Here’s a play on his recent series of flip-flops.
Here’s one that ALWAYS makes me laugh.
This one is the Obama Express!
I‘m beginning to see more and more signs of the pathetic state of education these days. Either an awful lot of the Generation Obama kids were asleep during their Civics classes or they all hate the Constitution. Which amendment will this Constitutional Law Lecturer (on leave) and his minions dismiss next?
The First Amendment has always been my favorite. I’m particularly fond of exercising free speech and avoiding other people’s religions. I’m also all about peaceful assemblage (ask my local bartender) and petioning the government with grievances (ask my Senator she undoubtedly has a file cabinet of letters from me). The last few days, exercising free speech has been more difficult for some folks like me. This is because Senator Obama’s minions are more concerned with the appearance of unity than adherence to the Constitution.
“Did Google use its network of online services to silence critics of Barack Obama? That was the question buzzing on a corner of the blogosphere over the last few days, after several anti-Obama bloggers were unable to update their sites, which are hosted on Google’s Blogger service.”
There is much circumstantial evidence that some Obama supporters were trying to take down anti-Obama blog sites during Unitystock. There have been active threads and posts on this topic many places. I’ve been particularly interested because I do value the Constitution and because many of my friends and their right to free speech were silenced by google’s heavy hand. One of my friend’s GeekLove was a target. She was interviewed by many folks. It seems Obamatrons believe it was warranted. I gleaned this comment off of a No Quarter’s Thread.
Sometimes these bloggers would send out stupid chain e-mails or encourage their supporters to. Usually in support of Hillary.
I just want to stick a sic all over this comment, Mort. First, fragmented sentences are grammatically uncool. Also, telling folks they don’t have a right to support candidates or not support candidates in their own special way is just Unamerican uncool. Please go ask your civics teacher for a refresher course on the first amendment. Once you’re done with that, go find a good English teacher, you need one.
There are just many, many things wrong with shutting down sites during ‘unity’ week. First,well, it creates disunity. Second, it appears that you’re forcing unity. Third, well, again let’s get back to that constitution. You’re denying some one their right to free speech.
There was also denial of freedom of assembly. Obama campaign staff actively tried to remove protesters and their signs from the ‘unity’ marketing site. There are first hand accounts (and video) of Obama campaign staff both removing the right to peaceful assembly which is also an important part of the First Amendment but also trying to take the signs of those wishing to express disunity. Oh, that inconvenient first amendment. Check the video and threads on Riverdaughter’s The Confluence (http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/unity-through-purge/).
Then there’s the Obama shuffle concerning the Second Amendment. Does he or doesn’t he support the right to bear arms with restrictions, no restrictions, or some restrictions. Well, like many Obama positions, it depends on the day you ask him. This from ABC’s Legalities (http://blogs.abcnews.com/legalities/2008/02/obama-and-guns.html).
“There’s been a long standing argument among constitutional scholars about whether the 2nd Amendment referred simply to militias or whether it spoke to an individual right to possess arms,” Obama said. “I think the latter is the better argument. There is an individual right to bear arms, but it is subject to common-sense regulation just like most of our rights are subject to common-sense regulation.” Watch Obama’s comments HERE.
He declined, just as the Bush Administration did, to take a position on whether the DC gun ban violates the 2nd Amendment. He said instead that states and cities should have broad latitude to regulate guns—even if the Constitution guarantees an individual right to own them.
“The city of Chicago has gun laws, so does Washington, DC,” Obama said. “The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can’t initiate gun safety laws to deal with gang bangers and random shootings on the street isn’t borne out by our Constitution.”
Now that sure sounds like someone who thinks the handgun bans would be a reasonable restriction under the 2nd Amendment. However there is this quote too from the same source.
“A day after the tragic shootings at NIU, Barack Obama has revealed that he thinks the 2nd Amendment protects an individual’s right to own a gun.
That sounds surprising—and certainly not what you’d expect from someone with the Senate’s most liberal voting record”
Okay, this is the same article. Can some one tell me which version of the second amendment he just endorsed?
I’m going straight to Daily Kampf for Obama and the Fourth Amendment. I just can’t resist when a cheeto blogger recognizes the way Obama will sell out the constitution for a little peace and harmony in Congress. The Cheeto bloggers love them some Fourth Amendment.
I really need a new word for everything Barack Obama is doing these days. Obama’s positions change based on what will get him elected (flip-flop flop flips). I’m actually of the opinion he’s a pathological liar. His campaign is in some extraordinary phase of Darwinian Evolution. He’s devolving into something base and beyond trifling.
Today’s issue of the Black Agenda Report: Obama Tells Lies
So, please, try to convince me here, that the Black Agenda Report is being racist. Any time Obama’s lies find the light of day and we discuss them, the rest of us get thwapped with the race card. If you don’t think a white person can call Obama out on his lies, flip flops, gaffes and corporate shilling, then please, go there and take THEIR word for it.
Paul Street tells it like it is. Obama is not just another corporate shill. He’s raised corporate shilling to an artform. One of Obama’s favorite spiels is how his netroots campaign is full of little people giving little bits of money. Street makes it clear to us that Obama’s source of funds is not us little guys. Penny Pritzker, his finance committee chair, has churned up bundlers from a veritable who’s who list of bad guys in the Mortgage Meltdown. GIven Pritzker’s one of the alligators in this swamp, I shouldn’t be too suprised. It is also probably why you NEVER hear Senator Obama talk about some of the biggest rip-offs of poor folks (especially poor minorites and active duty military) these days: Subprime lending, Payday lending, and other predatory practices aimed at the unbanked. This would include making certain no bank branches are available in rural, urban, or other areas where many poor folk live so they are forced to rely on these loans sharks with legal status. If Senator Obama is concerned about inner city blacks, why is he taking so much money from the very people that fleece them every chance they get? This is consistent with his relationship with slumlord Rezko. Let the little people live in slums while Obama gets a sweetheart deal on a mansion and a sideyard.
The top contributors list also explains why Obama’s alternate energy polices frequently include nuclear energy (while he knew NOTHING of the Hanford site while campaigning in Oregon) and ethanol (a really, really inefficient alternative fuel that is a windfall for corporate farming). Obama’s progressive politics appear to be solidly based on the market. The highest bidder wins the Obama treatment.
“Too bad Obama is disproportionately funded by people from the top 1 percent of Americans, who own nearly 40 percent of the nation’s wealth and who account for more than 80 percent of campaign contributions above $250. Through April of 2008, the Campaign Finance Institute reports, Obama received more than $89 million in contributions of $1000 or more, just $8 million less than McCain’s total take ($97.3 million).
According to the Center for Responsive Politics Obama’s top contributors include Goldman Sachs (#1 at $571,000), UBSAG (#3 at $365,000), JP Morgan Chase (#4 at $362,000), Citigroup (#5 at $358,000), Lehman Bros. (#7 at 4319,000), Google (#8 at $318,000), multinational corporate law firm Sidley Austin LLP (#10 at $294,000)and nuclear energy powerhouse Exelon (#15 at $236,000}.
No wonder Obama doesn’t want $3 from each American Taxpayer. He can get a lot more for those Wall Street bundlers. For more information from Street, and more lists of lies, please go to the Black Agenda Report. Also, read his list of suggestions on what TRUE campaign finance reform would look like, why Obama lies and how this hurts the future of black political voices, and what authentic progressives and folks interested in poverty issues and providing opportunity to minorities really support. Here’s that link.
Oh, and all you trifilin’ people out there … stop playing that damned race card! You’re de-sensitizing folks to the REAL racial injustices that still exist in this country. Try taking on Subprime lending practices or predatory lending! Try asking for REAL UNIVERSAL health care instead of Obama’s watered down shill. Try equallizing resources among schools! This is just a suggestion from a teacher trying to keep it real in the Ninth WARD of New Orleans.