A reader who asks for anonymity but refers to himself as “a product of Pittsburgh Steelworkers” writes about his discomfort over Obama:
An observation about Barack Obama that bothers me enough to write somebody an email.
Barack Obama said during the first debate that he would sit down and talk to Iran, a state sponsor of terrorism, without preconditions because he did not believe in the notion that by not talking to people we are somehow punishing
Then when a Florida TV reporter asks his VP candidate, Sen. Biden, some questions he didn’t like, their campaign cuts them off and refuses to talk to them or grant any further interviews.
So, Barack Obama is willing to sit down and talk with the regime that gave the order for the bombing of our Marine Barracks in Beirut but not willing to talk to an American TV station because of a few tough questions.
Politicians all make contradictory statements; it’s almost impossible not to considering all the speeches they make. But this is different. This is a case of actions speaking louder than words. His cutting off of that Florida station is a preview of how he will act as President. Will he be this vindictive towards all Americans who don’t agree with him or his administration? Cutting off that station but still being willing to talk to a terror sponsoring regime also reveals a certain naiveté, or worse, an unacceptable level of moral relativism.
This, combined with his going back on his word about public campaign financing, I think, are a true measure of his character.
[All links and italics mine – admin]
The writer states that he basically just needed to say that to someone. In his profession, he is not free to speak out. Apparently the “tolerant” folks around him do not tolerate diverse opinions.
Well, I’m glad he said it to me, and allowed me to pass it on to you. He’s quite right. Obama reveals inconsistency, naivete, relativism (and remember what good Pope Benedict XVI has said to us about The Dictatorship of Relativism) and a tendency toward suppressive and vengeful behavior to those who do not fall in line.
Yes, it’s troubling.
People are hoping to get the LA Times to release the tape it is holding – is refusing to release in order to protect Obama (can you even believe I’m writing that sentence in America?) – but you know, we don’t really need it to learn who Obama is. His actions speak volumes. For all his dodginess, all his unreleased medical reports, all of his his unreleased transcripts, all his votes of “present” and smooth evasions, Obama has effectively shown us who he is; all that is needed is for the twinkle-dust to be rubbed out from the eyes, to see it.
He’s the guy who lets his auntie live in a slum and tells her to keep silent until after the election, while he’s lecturing Joe the Plumber about “sharing the wealth” and talking at his rallies about the “selfishness” of those who disagree with his policies.He’s the guy who does not talk to the press anymore, takes no questions, and expects only softballs and agreement.
He’s the guy who spends over half a billion dollars to win an election because he could not keep his word about public funding. He wants to ‘share the wealth’ and he wants to talk about ‘fairness’ – but he doesn’t have any moral qualms about outspending his opponent by $518 million, thanks to a dishonorable flip-flop which – it must be said – his GOP opponent did not copy.
He’s a guy who spends half a billion dollars on electioneering while talking about how to help the poor and the downtrodden. Note – he does not share his wealth. Someday he’ll drive past those downtrodden and give them a thumbs up for keeping it real, as they stand in their lines full of “shared” discomfort.
Obama is precisely the type who goes about bouncing on fluffy pillows of honest-to-goodness wealth, shaking a rhetorical finger at us for daring to try to get comfortable on our foam rubber mats of hard-earned wages.
He’s quite the little despot, ain’t he? I thought he – like Bill Clinton – would be too tall to be a despot, but he’s belying that old canard. And here is more information about his dubious associations
Pope Benedict: there is one truth