![[freedomtowernight_edited.jpg]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_i7tmcOiJ4hc/RoJ3zn0O-9I/AAAAAAAAAFw/5Y4WaIwDd6k/s1600/freedomtowernight_edited.jpg)
Comparing Illegals to MLK (UPDATED)
Hillary and Obama were in South Florida yesterday to rally the Hispanic troops, so to speak. As this Sun-Sentinel article indicates, the two Democratic front-runners were at a La Raza convention on Miami Beach, prime territory to talk pander to a prime voting bloc about immigration issues.
"C'mon Robert, they're politicians. They're supposed to pander", you might be saying to yourself. Of course, you would be correct. We especially expect this from Hillary Clinton.
However, Obama may be a different story. Believe it or not (and please be gentle), I bought and read Obama's book The Audacity of Hope. I would not vote for him unless the circumstances were VERY extraordinary, but in the book Obama comes across as a likeable guy who worked hard to get to where he's at, as well as giving the impression of being capable of having some common sense answers to many of our problems.
It's in that context that the following passage from the article surprised me (emphasis mine):
For everyone reading this, Democrats, Republicans and Indies, I guess it's just another example of modern-day politics and a glaring reason why nothing concrete seems to get accomplished these days by either party.
UPDATE - 6:30 PM: Forgot to throw in this related nugget from the Sun-Sentinel. A poll shows that the vast majority of Hispanics in the U.S. care more about education than immigration. Perhaps Hillary and Obama need to pander, I mean focus, more on Hispanic education issues.
"C'mon Robert, they're politicians. They're supposed to pander", you might be saying to yourself. Of course, you would be correct. We especially expect this from Hillary Clinton.
However, Obama may be a different story. Believe it or not (and please be gentle), I bought and read Obama's book The Audacity of Hope. I would not vote for him unless the circumstances were VERY extraordinary, but in the book Obama comes across as a likeable guy who worked hard to get to where he's at, as well as giving the impression of being capable of having some common sense answers to many of our problems.
It's in that context that the following passage from the article surprised me (emphasis mine):
Obama took a more rousing approach (than Clinton) with a stump speech, punctuated by cheering supporters and music, in which he likened the recent massive rallies of undocumented immigrants and their supporters to the civil rights movement.Give me a Barack-eak, Barack (sorry I couldn't help myself with the pun)! I don't think I have to explain why your correlation between black civil rights and illegal immigrants is so wrong. You try to come across as a nice guys trying to be moderate on many issues, despite your voting record in the Senate. But the above proves that, at least to pander to potential voters, you'll say anything even if it's totally out of perspective and ridiculous. Coming from someone of your background, that's very disappointing.
"Our separate struggles are really one," Obama said, quoting a telegram Martin Luther King Jr. sent in 1968 to farmworker activist César Chávez. "The civil rights movement wasn't just for African Americans."
He said the struggle for equality is unfinished.
"It doesn't matter if that struggle involves a brown man who is badgered again and again to prove his citizenship or a black man who's pulled over because his car is too nice," Obama said.
For everyone reading this, Democrats, Republicans and Indies, I guess it's just another example of modern-day politics and a glaring reason why nothing concrete seems to get accomplished these days by either party.
UPDATE - 6:30 PM: Forgot to throw in this related nugget from the Sun-Sentinel. A poll shows that the vast majority of Hispanics in the U.S. care more about education than immigration. Perhaps Hillary and Obama need to pander, I mean focus, more on Hispanic education issues.
Labels: Barack Obama, Hillary, immigration
posted by Robert at 12:30 PM
3 Comments:
"Believe it or not (and please be gentle), I bought and read Obama's book The Audacity of Hope."
Robert, I've always said you were a fair guy. However, I know all I need to know about Obama from his words in speeches and his voting record (in Illinois and in the Senate): He's a socialist, through and through. He's in favor of killing babies, even late term, he's in favor of massive government involvement in just about every aspect of our life, including and especially health care. He's in favor of more restrictive gun control. Three strikes.
I don't vote for reds.
George,
Nothing wrong with seeing what the other side is saying and thinking, lest we risk getting blindsided by them and their flock.
You're correct. Obama despite his apparent understanding of "the other side" supports those things you mentioned. His book sort of glosses them over a bit, but it still comes through. Like I said, I would only vote for him under VERY extraordinary circumstances...Obama vs Osama, Obama vs fidel, Obama vs Hillary. You see where I'm getting at, right?
It is sad when we've become so accustomed to dishonesty and mediocrity in politicians that people go ga-ga over an Obama who, despite being having a very liberal
voting record and being quite inexperienced, speaks in direct and optimistic tones in sharp contrast to Hillary and Edwards.
People will also overlook the stupid statement Obama just made this past weekend because he's so darn straight and caring! Pretty sad state we're in, I'm afraid.
Obama seems like a decent guy, but he's much too inexperienced to be president, he's taken foolish positions on a number of important issues -- immigration being only the latest -- and, as George observes, he's a socialist. But at least he appears to have principles, even though most of them are wrong. Looking at his competitors: Edwards appears to be a complete phony with no principles of any kind, and Clinton, who comes across as more of an adult than the other two, is deeply corrupt AND probably a socialist at heart. I'm not sure who's the lesser of evils here, though I'm sure I wouldn't vote for Edwards over Obama or Clinton.
Post a Comment
<< Home