Say Anything Blog

But “Y” isn’t what Obama actually said no matter how much you try and spin it.

Obama said people cling to their religion, guns, hatred of people not like them because they’re bitter.

If he didn’t mean that, why did he say it?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Are you purposefully ignoring the obvious or do you honestly not hear what is plainly said?

Small town Americans feel (emotion) economic issues are not going to be won at the polls so they take refuge in and vote these other issues. This is clearly a statement of cause and effect and plainly suggests the relative insignificance of these other issues compared to economic ones.

OR.......again thats “OR”....HG......he is saying that they feel they aren’t going to be able to make a difference by voting on economic issues, so instead they vote on issues that they can really change.  They vote on these issues that are easy to be emotional about.  It’s not as complex to fix gay marriage, as much as it is complex to fix the economy.  It’s not as complex to make sure you have guns as it is to make sure you have a job.  It’s easy to vote God in the pledge of allegiance, its hard to vote in a 20% pay increase.

This is really very simple HG.

Y = People vote on issues like Guns and Religion because they feel they can make a difference on those issues and because they are emotional issues that [they] have been rallied [to].

So, if small town Americans felt they could make a difference economically at the polls, they:

1. Wouldn’t be such frustrated and bitter defenders of these other issues?

2. Wouldn’t be easily “seduced” into supporting these other issues at the expense of economic policies favorable to thier local industries?

But “Y” isn’t what Obama actually said no matter how much you try and spin it.

Obama said people cling to their religion, guns, hatred of people not like them because they’re bitter.

If he didn’t mean that, why did he say it?

See Rob.  This is why I love you.  I had to deliberately use X and Y in order to condense the issues to their purest form.  And you still try to spin it.

X is X, no matter how hard you spin it.  Y is Y.

Obama said X one day...because he spoke clumsily in a room full of people who knew what he was talking about.  But then said X the next day to clarify what he meant.  This was also stated by Webb in 2006.  Showing that this is a constant line of thinking in our party.

Obama said X one day...because he spoke clumsily in a room full of people who knew what he was talking about.  But then said X the next day to clarify what he meant.

He said X one day in a clear and concise manner, and when it proved controversial tried to spin it by saying Y the next day.

You’ll notice that when Obama was saying “Y” he suddenly wasn’t saying anything about being anti-immigrant.  That’s the tell.  He was spinning.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

This is really very simple HG.

Simple-minded and still condescending and offensive.  The implication remains no matter how you word it—small town Americans vote these other issues and cling to these “bulwarks” out of misplaced frustration. 

It is plain as day H, sorry you can’t see the forest for the trees.

H. would like us to take what Obama said and ignore the implications and logical end of his condescension.

So, if small town Americans felt they could make a difference economically at the polls, they:

1:  Would vote on the economic issues and feel that it would actually make a difference (its the Economy stupid).  Big time!

2:  Would still vote on the other issues, but wouldn’t be as passionate or emotional about voting on Guns, Gay Marriage or clinging to Religion, cultural identity as strongly.

He said X one day in a clear and concise manner, and when it proved controversial tried to spin it by saying Y the next day.

Yeah, sorry...i meant Y.

You’ll notice that when Obama was saying “Y” he suddenly wasn’t saying anything about being anti-immigrant.  That’s the tell.  He was spinning.

But he said the same thing over and over and over.  He included illegal immigration in another speech.  You know this, you criticized him for it.

Would still vote on the other issues, but wouldn’t be as passionate or emotional about voting on Guns, Gay Marriage or clinging to Religion, cultural identity as strongly.

There you go H.  You found it.  Way to go!

Simple-minded and still condescending and offensive.  The implication remains no matter how you word it—small town Americans vote these other issues and cling to these “bulwarks” out of misplaced frustration.

Show me a sentence where those words were used.  You wont, you cant, because they weren’t. 

You imagine he said that because you desire it.  But it is not the reality and you know it.

There you go H.  You found it.  Way to go!

That doesn’t change a thing.  I dedicated a year to fighting blogs on immigration.  Why?  Because it was a much easier battle to fight than the economic battle.  I am not an economist and immigration is very important to me..VERY...but even more-so because it’s something I believe I can make a difference in fighting.  It’s an argument that can be won.

Again, this is all to basic.

H,

You’re getting silly now.  What would you call frustration from perceived economic disenfranchisement that manifests itself in a disproportional support for unrelated issues if not misplaced?

Easy big fella.

Would still vote on the other issues, but wouldn’t be as passionate or emotional about voting on Guns, Gay Marriage or clinging to Religion, cultural identity as strongly.

H, these are your own words based on your understanding of what Obama said.  Don’t tell me you meant to say something else.

What would you call frustration from perceived economic disenfranchisement that manifests itself in a disproportional support for unrelated issues if not misplaced?

Way to distort buddy.  Who used the word “disproportional”? 

Are you debating me or the voices in your head?

Who used the word “disproportional”?

H, is this the best you can do?  You said yourself these bitter voters “wouldn’t be as passionate or emotional about” those non-economic issues.  This bitterness apparently brings out more passion for these non-economic issues than would otherwise exist hence, disproportional.

Notice that sannitized, theracebaitingpovertypimp, still refuses to admit that his Party, the Democrat Party, is the cause of lost jobs and disenfranchisement of people in America. Instead it blahblahs about semantical crap and attempts to distract people from Obamoid’s actual words. The words that came out of his mouth when he thought he was in a super secret, private meeting with a group of uber-wealthy leftards.

And the best part? The mostess goodest part of all? He walk out of the Koffee Klatch with a big, fat, juicy donation. From the Getty family. Where does all their money come from? What industry are they bigtime movers&shakers in?

Hello,,,,Hello! sannitized? What industry has made(and continues to make) the Gettys so vastly wealthy? Here is a hint. It is one of the industries that has made Algore so vastly wealthy, and it ain’t zinc mining.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

H, is this the best you can do?  You said yourself these bitter voters “wouldn’t be as passionate or emotional about” those non-economic issues.  This bitterness apparently brings out more passion for these non-economic issues than would otherwise exist hence, disproportional.

HG,

I don’t know why you think you have made some point here?  Having MORE passion doesn’t mean you don’t have any.  It means MORE.  I used the exact words I planned.

Have you ever had dogs?  When you lost one, do you think it made you love your others that much more?  I think that is usually the case.  When you loose a child, do you all of a sudden make it more of an issue to cling to the children you have left, and be more involved in their lives?  I think undoubtedly yes.

If that child were to come back, somehow, would you love it any less than the others?  No, you would love all your children similarly.  There would be no disproportional love.

Notice that sannitized, theracebaitingpovertypimp, still refuses to admit that his Party, the Democrat Party, is the cause of lost jobs and disenfranchisement of people in America. Instead it blahblahs about semantical crap and attempts to distract people from Obamoid’s actual words

Doh, one fell out of the cuckoo nest.  Better get him/her back in before it attempts to live on its own.

H,

I appreciate your efforts but love and frustration or bitterness are very different emotions.  I’ll make it as simple as I can.  If I disagree with issue Y, feel helpless to affect Y, and subsequently am frustrated and bitter over it, then carry that emotion to issues A, B, C, & D, I have misdirected and misplaced frustration and bitterness that A, B, C, & D does not warrant. 

But all this really is simply semantics and my point already made and acknowledge by yourself.  You may not see the significance of the point, but then again you’re a liberal so I wouldn’t expect you’d understand.  Thanks for the discussion though.

And you still refuse to address the fact that your Party has created, and continues to exacerbate the problems that Democrat Voters are bitter about. Keep spinning, racebaitingpovertypimp, its all you can do.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

I’ll make it as simple as I can.  If I disagree with issue Y, feel helpless to affect Y, and subsequently am frustrated and bitter over it, then carry that emotion to issues A, B, C, & D, I have misdirected and misplaced frustration and bitterness that A, B, C, & D does not warrant.

Again, HG, you keep changing the argument to suit yours.

NOBODY said that voters carry frustration over to other emotional issues.  Where did anybody say that?

I notice you didnt provide a quote.  No evidence to support your claim.  Instead you only offer your feeble interpretation of what you THINK someone said then dismiss me as a Liberal for not understanding your point.  A point that has no logic applied to it.

Go ahead, RUN Forrest,.......Run.

2Motel6,

You still have not admitted that your party ruined the economy by starting a war we didnt need to be in, introduced AQ in Iraq in incredible numbers and jeapordized the stability of the ME.

Nor have you admitted that you guys have ruined the US economy, ruined mortgage rates, raised gas prices, increased the unemployment rate, brought in more illegal aliens.  Why haven’t you admitted this you race-baiting, war-monger?

Nor have you admitted that you guys have ruined the US economy, ruined mortgage rates, raised gas prices, increased the unemployment rate, brought in more illegal aliens.  Why haven’t you admitted this you race-baiting, war-monger?

None of what you say is true; I guess that’s the main reason.  The US economy is not “ruined”, despite the obstruction of the Dem Congress since ‘06, when the bad stuff started; Carter and Clinton’s affirmative action on home loans is the foundation of the mortgage “crisis”; the unemployment rate is lower than Clinton’s was when he claimed “the greatest economy ever”; fighting terrorism after Clinton enabled 9/11 by his ignoring Al Qaeda’s rise during the Nineties; Illegal aliens are shared by this administration, but it’s not totally responsible for it.  The war against Islamic terrorism has provided Iraq with its first elected govt in 5000 years.
You’re just wrong with your typical leftie talking points.  Time for your brain transplant, little dude!

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Having MORE passion doesn’t mean you don’t have any.

H, I think you succeeded in making this point.  From Obama’s first remarks it sounded as if STA’s only gave a rip about God, guns, immigration, etc., because of frustration over econmic issues; not that bitterness and frustration gave extra attention to these other issues.  But regardless, the degree or amount of extra attention BO thinks is directed at these other issues remains in question.  It has long been common democrat psycho-babble that STA’s are somehow handicapped by our “need” for foundational and constitutional absolutes which keeps us closed-minded to “change” (ie, a living interpretation of the constitution that would allow for socialism in America). I believe BO holds to similar nonsense based on his first statement and that his second was damage control.

Where did anybody say that?

Would still vote on the other issues, but wouldn’t be as passionate or emotional about voting on Guns, Gay Marriage or clinging to Religion, cultural identity as strongly.

The politics of the Karl Rove era were designed to distract and divide the very people who would ordinarily be rebelling against the deterioration of their way of life. Working Americans have been repeatedly seduced at the polls by emotional issues such as the predictable mantra of “God, guns, gays, abortion and the flag” while their way of life shifted ineluctably beneath their feet. But this election cycle showed an electorate that intends to hold government leaders accountable for allowing every American a fair opportunity to succeed.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009246

Strange, but Webb doesn’t say anything about frustration or bitterness.  Instead, he only indicates that when voters dont think they can change the economic situation, they focus on emotional issues.

You know.....issues that you are emotional about.

And regarding the statement Obama said, but didnt mean, well, what does he say?

So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, and they cling to guns, or religion, or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them, or anti-immigrant sentiment, or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

So even at Obamas worst, he is only saying that people cling to these emotional issues (A, B, C, D), because they are frustrated that they cant change the economic ones (Y).....they “cling” to those issues as a way to explain the frustration they have about (Y).

Again....NOTHING was misplaced.  Nobody said they were frustrated about A,B,C and D.  Instead only that they cling to them and that they are emotional issues.

Nice try HG.

None of what you say is true; I guess that’s the main reason.  The US economy is not “ruined”, despite the obstruction of the Dem Congress since

Congratulations Robert, you figured out sarcasm.  Now you know why I didn’t answer 2Motel6’s false accusations.

Aside from that, it is an attempt to change the subject.

You still have not admitted that your party ruined the economy by starting a war we didnt need to be in, introduced AQ in Iraq in incredible numbers and jeapordized the stability of the ME.

H, Admitting we’re at war is a good start.
Fighting AQ in Iraq is a hell of a lot easier and safer than fighting them in Iran, or here on our own turf.  The idea that “stability” existed in the ME is laughable.

Nor have you admitted that you guys have ruined the US economy, ruined mortgage rates, raised gas prices, increased the unemployment rate, brought in more illegal aliens.  Why haven’t you admitted this you race-baiting, war-monger?

Ruined the US economy?  Did Clinton ruin the US economy at the end of his term?  Could it be that economic cycles exist?  Could it be that things aren’t quite as bad as you make them out to be?  BTW, what increase in taxes would correct our economic woes?  Ruined mortgage rates?  They are still at historic lows.  Raised gas prices?  Who is stifling supply by forbidding any US infrastructure?  Brought in more illegals?  I thought you wanted more illegals?  It is your liberal social spending and stupid laws that promise we Americans will pay for all illegals that is drawing them in.  H, really, you got to get back down to earth my friend.

HG,

Don’t take the bait.  I was just rambling non-sense like 2Motel6.  I wouldnt expect him to admit that any more that he/she should expect me to admit its accusations.

I believe BO holds to similar nonsense based on his first statement and that his second was damage control.

It would be one thing if he wasn’t talking about economic issues and if people are going to vote on them or not.  But he was, and that changes everything.

Congratulations Robert, you figured out sarcasm.

You said it, you got thoroughly refuted, now you claim you didn’t really mean it.  Typical of you, little dude.

The next time you attempt sarcasm, use a sarcasm tag; otherwise you’re just lying to cover your ass.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

But he was, and that changes everything.

No, it doesn’t; he proved he was out of touch with real Americans, and he shared his disdain for real Americans when he thought no one was listening to him speak to his rich leftie elitist buddies.  He got busted, and you’re spinning like top to deny the obvious truth.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

You can not deny this,"And you still refuse to address the fact that your Party has created, and continues to exacerbate the problems that Democrat Voters are bitter about. Keep spinning, racebaitingpovertypimp, its all you can do.”, and so you stamp your diminutive little foot and dance about in circles. As usual.

HG, sannitized, the racebaitingpovertypimp, has done its standard bullshit. It started out screeching about how Obamoid’s words did not mean what they actually do. Then it hared off into some bizzaro world semantical crap, ending by spinning around and parroting back what you have said and claiming that is what it meant all along. This is what it always does. Go back and check a few threads. This is its SOP.

And the best part? The most gooderest, bestest part? Obamoid is correct! Democrat voters are bitter, and clinging to the blind insanity that voting for another Democrat will make it all better.

sanni? Barack Hussein Obama said it, and he meant it exactly as said. And you can not prove he didn’t.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

Ok, here you go dipshits. (apply where appropriate)

Here is Obama saying the same thing IN 2004, that you claim he was only saying as damage control.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a88wMPAWc90&feature=related

You are being ridiculous with this.  When you see the video of Obama talking about this very same thing in 2004, in the proper context you are going to look even more stupid, if it is possible.  But you will ignore and dismiss this as well.  Because on top of being stupid, you will be dishonest and claim he didn’t mean what he said.....clearly.....in 2004.

So, you are proving that Obamoid DOES believe Democrat voters are bitter, religiously unstable gun nuts who hate immigrants and the environment. See, HG? It simply spins around in circles.

He said it, he meant it as said, and you just proved it. Here is your ass, don’t bother to come back, racebaitingpovertypimp.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

Oh, and still waiting for all that prove about the many lies Rob tells. Since you are crawling away with your tail between your legs I guess we will never receive any of that evidence.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

What are you going to say now Rob?

Now that I have demonstrated that Obamas remarks proceeded Webs by two years… and that they not only match Webbs remarks, but also Obamas remarks from the days after Pennsylvania.

Now, Rob will obfuscate, and cry that he heard what Obama said (in SF)....even though in Robs head, he merely took what Obama said out of context.

Obama being interviewed by Charlie Rose back on Nov. 23, 20041 and he gives a fuller description of what he was trying to get at in his Pennsylvania remarks:

CHARLIE ROSE: But they seem too, you know, there`s a book about what`s wrong with Kansas, as you know.

BARACK OBAMA: Right, and my mother is from Kansas, so, yes.

CHARLIE ROSE: And basically, the book argues that people in hardship cases, people who have not gotten the best end of the American dream, are voting on faith issues and morality issues rather than on economic interests.

BARACK OBAMA: Right.

CHARLIE ROSE: Which suggests that that has somehow become a touch stone in a way that there`s…

BARACK OBAMA: Well, I`ll tell you an example. There`s a town that I spoke about in my speech, actually, in Illinois. And it`s I think representative of many towns in the Midwest. Galesburg, Illinois. They`ve got 36,000 people. They`ve lost 4,000 jobs in the last two years; 20 percent of their employment base collapses, because companies move out to Mexico.

So you sit down and you talk to union workers, 50, 55-year-old guys, who—the best that`s being offered to them is retraining to be nurses assistants. Right, these guys with beards and tough guys who are used to handling heavy machinery.

They`re not optimistic about the prospects for them to be able to attain the kinds of economic security that they had under the old system. So they`ve got insecurity in their economic life. They don`t know where their health care is coming from. They don`t know what`s happening with their pension.
What they do know is that they can go out with their friends and hunt and feel a sense of camaraderie. And there`s a connection between hunting and them going out with their father to hunt, just as there is a connection maybe for their wives to going to church and going with their grandmother to church.

And if we don`t have plausible answers on the economic front, and we appear to be condescending towards those traditions that are giving their lives some stability, then they`re going to opt for at least that party that seems to be speaking to the things that are giving—that still provide them something solid to stand on.

CHARLIE ROSE: And some sense that they`re not being looked down on.

BARACK OBAMA: Exactly.

CHARLIE ROSE: Somebody who does not think that they are contemptuous of them and their lifestyle and their beliefs.

BARACK OBAMA: Absolutely.

1The Charlie Rose Show
November 23, 2004 Tuesday
SHOW: THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
Interview with Barack Obama
BYLINE: Charlie Rose
GUESTS: Barack Obama
SECTION: NEWS; Domestic

Again, youve been acting like an idiot on this issue Rob.  And I took great pleasure proving it.

2Motel6,

You are dumber than dumb.  I can’t even believe you can walk, let alone type and/or tie your shoes when you get up in the morning.

Stop pretending that you are significant or that you are making an argument.

I am not making an argument. I am handing you your ass. Obamoid said it, he meant it. And you are bitter.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem