The night we waved goodbye to America... our last best hope on Earth

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,956
1,910
113
The customers of the Lord Clyde, a pub near to where I live, have all placed bets on when they think Barack Obama will be assassinated.

Remember, whereas the British Empire abolished slavery in 1807 (meaning Britain was the first country in the world to abolish slavery, one of the many good things the British Empire did) , it wasn't until the 1860s and a Civil War that slavery ended in the United States.

And blacks still weren't allow to vote, and sit in certain areas of buses, until as late as the 1960s in the so-called "Land of the Free."

But now a black man (or, to be more pedantic, a half-caste man) has been elected President.

Who would have thought it?

But haven't the Left just gone slightly over the top in their adulation for Obama?


The night we waved goodbye to America... our last best hope on Earth

08th November 2008
Daily Mail

Anyone would think we had just elected a hip, skinny and youthful replacement for God, with a plan to modernise Heaven and Hell – or that at the very least John Lennon had come back from the dead.

The swooning frenzy over the choice of Barack Obama as President of the United States must be one of the most absurd waves of self-deception and swirling fantasy ever to sweep through an advanced civilisation. At least Mandela-worship – its nearest equivalent – is focused on a man who actually did something.

I really don’t see how the Obama devotees can ever in future mock the Moonies, the Scientologists or people who claim to have been abducted in flying saucers. This is a cult like the one which grew up around Princess Diana, bereft of reason and hostile to facts.



The night America changed: Barack and Michelle Obama in Chicago


It already has all the signs of such a thing. The newspapers which recorded Obama’s victory have become valuable relics. You may buy Obama picture books and Obama calendars and if there isn’t yet a children’s picture version of his story, there soon will be.

Proper books, recording his sordid associates, his cowardly voting record, his astonishingly militant commitment to unrestricted abortion and his blundering trip to Africa, are little-read and hard to find.

If you can believe that this undistinguished and conventionally Left-wing machine politician is a sort of secular saviour, then you can believe anything. He plainly doesn’t believe it himself.

His cliche-stuffed, PC clunker of an acceptance speech suffered badly from nerves. It was what you would expect from someone who knew he’d promised too much and that from now on the easy bit was over.

He needn’t worry too much. From now on, the rough boys and girls of America’s Democratic Party apparatus, many recycled from Bill Clinton’s stained and crumpled entourage, will crowd round him, to collect the rich spoils of his victory and also tell him what to do, which is what he is used to.

Just look at his sermon by the shores of Lake Michigan. He really did talk about a ‘new dawn’, and a ‘timeless creed’ (which was ‘yes, we can’). He proclaimed that ‘change has come’. He revealed that, despite having edited the Harvard Law Review, he doesn’t know what ‘enormity’ means. He reached depths of oratorical drivel never even plumbed by our own Mr Blair, burbling about putting our hands on the arc of history (or was it the ark of history?) and bending it once more toward the hope of a better day (Don’t try this at home).

I am not making this up. No wonder that awful old hack Jesse Jackson sobbed as he watched.

How he must wish he, too, could get away with this sort of stuff.

And it was interesting how the President-elect failed to lift his admiring audience by repeated – but rather hesitant – invocations of the brainless slogan he was forced by his minders to adopt against his will – ‘Yes, we can’. They were supposed to thunder ‘Yes, we can!’ back at him, but they just wouldn’t join in. No wonder. Yes we can what exactly? Go home and keep a close eye on the tax rate, is my advice. He’d have been better off bursting into ‘I’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony’ which contains roughly the same message and might have attracted some valuable commercial sponsorship.

Perhaps, being a Chicago crowd, they knew some of the things that 52.5 per cent of America prefers not to know. They know Obama is the obedient servant of one of the most squalid and unshakeable political machines in America. They know that one of his alarmingly close associates, a state-subsidised slum landlord called Tony Rezko, has been convicted on fraud and corruption charges.

They also know the US is just as segregated as it was before Martin Luther King – in schools, streets, neighbourhoods, holidays, even in its TV-watching habits and its choice of fast-food joint. The difference is that it is now done by unspoken agreement rather than by law.

If Mr Obama’s election had threatened any of that, his feel-good white supporters would have scuttled off and voted for John McCain, or practically anyone. But it doesn’t. Mr Obama, thanks mainly to the now-departed grandmother he alternately praised as a saint and denounced as a racial bigot, has the huge advantages of an expensive private education. He did not have to grow up in the badlands of useless schools, shattered families and gangs which are the lot of so many young black men of his generation.

If the nonsensical claims made for this election were true, then every positive discrimination programme aimed at helping black people into jobs they otherwise wouldn’t get should be abandoned forthwith. Nothing of the kind will happen. On the contrary, there will probably be more of them.

And if those who voted for Obama were all proving their anti-racist nobility, that presumably means that those many millions who didn’t vote for him were proving themselves to be hopeless bigots. This is obviously untrue.


Yes we can what?: Barack Obama ran on the ticket of change


I was in Washington DC the night of the election. America’s beautiful capital has a sad secret.

It is perhaps the most racially divided city in the world, with 15th Street – which runs due north from the White House – the unofficial frontier between black and white. But, like so much of America, it also now has a new division, and one which is in many ways much more important.

I had attended an election-night party in a smart and liberal white area, but was staying the night less than a mile away on the edge of a suburb where Spanish is spoken as much as English, plus a smattering of tongues from such places as Ethiopia, Somalia and Afghanistan.

As I walked, I crossed another of Washington’s secret frontiers. There had been a few white people blowing car horns and shouting, as the result became clear. But among the Mexicans, Salvadorans and the other Third World nationalities, there was something like ecstasy.

They grasped the real significance of this moment. They knew it meant that America had finally switched sides in a global cultural war. Forget the Cold War, or even the Iraq War. The United States, having for the most part a deeply conservative people, had until now just about stood out against many of the mistakes which have ruined so much of the rest of the world.

Suspicious of welfare addiction, feeble justice and high taxes, totally committed to preserving its own national sovereignty, unabashedly Christian in a world part secular and part Muslim, suspicious of the Great Global Warming panic, it was unique.

These strengths had been fading for some time, mainly due to poorly controlled mass immigration and to the march of political correctness. They had also been weakened by the failure of America’s conservative party – the Republicans – to fight on the cultural and moral fronts.

They preferred to posture on the world stage. Scared of confronting Left-wing teachers and sexual revolutionaries at home, they could order soldiers to be brave on their behalf in far-off deserts. And now the US, like Britain before it, has begun the long slow descent into the Third World. How sad. Where now is our last best hope on Earth?

dailymail.co.uk
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
Remember, whereas the British Empire abolished slavery in 1807 (meaning Britain was the first country in the world to abolish slavery, one of the many good things the British Empire did) , it wasn't until the 1860s and a Civil War that slavery ended in the United States.

Nice whitewash job there, setting aside the profits made by the Empire in the slave trade.
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
Whatever

After all of that, you are not looking ahead, but back.

Everyone is afraid of what 'one' sick head could do to Obama, but doesn't matter what his
color is, how about lincoln and kennedy.

No one can stop 'one' distorted brain or a conspiracy if that happens, but I look at Obama like I would look at a soldier, he has come forward and decided to put his life on the line, just as they do, and he will do what he can for the country, while he is there, just as they do.
Support him, and stand with him, he is genuine, and rather than look for sides of him that
are not 'true', see him for who he really is, a person who wants to 'help' and 'guide' and he
certainly has the intelligence and the gift of speech and vision, now, if everyone who he
places close around him, does their job, and no one becomes 'greedy', and want, for themselves only, good things can happen.

He will be starting from the bottom, not like george bush who started near the top, (economy), and took the country to the bottom, and now is handing it over to Obama.

It will take time, and if the people can't have the patience for the time it will take, then
they have no vision and no common sense.

GIVE HIM A CHANCE, that's all anyone can ask.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Yes, Im sure not being a place of such staunch nationalism and religious dogmatism will lead to becoming a third world.

I mean, I can think of a single third world nation thats nationalist and zealouslyr religious. All of them are politically correct secular western nations, all of them :p
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
He is not a man to be trusted...

there is 'no' evidence whatsoever for that statement, one has to 'do' something wrong, to prove
they are untrustworthy, and Obama has not done anything wrong, he has now been given a
chance to do something positive for his country.

Having a 'feeling' that he can't be trusted, is just saying something about yourself, not him.

Someone on this forum the other day said that he is 'too' slick and smooth, so I suppose that
means they should have elected a stumblebum like bush or palin, who can't speak the
english language properly, then they are OK, can't really make any sense of that analagy at all.

He is a very well spoken person, who has grasped the english language brilliantly and can
communicate just as well, if that is a fault, well, that's tough.
 

jjaycee98

Electoral Member
Jan 27, 2006
421
4
18
British Columbia
There will be a massive uprising if someone kills Obama. That won't stop some sicko bent on doing it, but his life would not be worth a plug nickle.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Lester, Blackleaf, I have lived in Britain for several years, so I am familiar with the British press. Daily Mail is a conservative newspaper. It is even to the right of the Tory party.

Without having seen Daily Mail for the past two years, I make a safe guess. Most of the articles in the Mail for the past two years have probably been supportive of McCain and against Obama.

In this respect, Daily Mail is even further to the right of the Tory party, the Tory leader; Mr. Cameron enthusiastically endorsed Obama a couple of months ago.

So I wouldn’t attach too much importance to what Daily Mail says, it would have been astounding indeed if it had said something complimentary about Obama.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
I was hoping for Obama victory, indeed a great majority of Canadians were, if one goes by the opinion polls.

It is really as much anti-Bush sentiment as it is pro Obama sentiment. Most of the world was rooting for Obama. Remember the enthusiastic reception Obama got in Germany?


The main reason is that Republicans by and large believe in American exceptionalism, the concept of Manifest Destiny. It assumes that USA has a special place in God’s plan for the world, that God loves USA more than he loves nay other nation, that he has bestowed a special blessing USA, over and above other nations.

So naturally Republicans tend to look down on other nations, it is clear in their attitude, their behavior, their actions etc. Not surprisingly, most of the world usually wants a Democrat to win. In 2000, polls showed that most of the world wanted Gore to win, in 2004, Kerry.
 

scratch

Senate Member
May 20, 2008
5,658
22
38
I was hoping for Obama victory, indeed a great majority of Canadians were, if one goes by the opinion polls.

It is really as much anti-Bush sentiment as it is pro Obama sentiment. Most of the world was rooting for Obama. Remember the enthusiastic reception Obama got in Germany?


The main reason is that Republicans by and large believe in American exceptionalism, the concept of Manifest Destiny. It assumes that USA has a special place in God’s plan for the world, that God loves USA more than he loves nay other nation, that he has bestowed a special blessing USA, over and above other nations.

So naturally Republicans tend to look down on other nations, it is clear in their attitude, their behavior, their actions etc. Not surprisingly, most of the world usually wants a Democrat to win. In 2000, polls showed that most of the world wanted Gore to win, in 2004, Kerry.

Apparently, Mr. Obama when he was in Germany to give a speech, sounded more like JFK. Nothing like what he was espousing in the U.S.

The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]

Espouse \Es*pouse"\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Espoused; p. pr. &
vb. n. Espousing.] [OF. espouser, esposer, F. ['e]pouser,
L. sponsare to betroth, espouse, fr. sponsus betrothed, p. p.
of spondere to promise solemnly or sacredly. Cf. Spouse.]
1. To betroth; to promise in marriage; to give as spouse.
[1913 Webster]

A virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph.
--Luke i. 27.
[1913 Webster]

2. To take as spouse; to take to wife; to marry.
[1913 Webster]

Lavinia will I make my empress, . . .
And in the sacred Pantheon her espouse. --Shak.
[1913 Webster]

3. To take to one's self with a view to maintain; to make
one's own; to take up the cause of; to adopt; to embrace.
"He espoused that quarrel." --Bacon.
[1913 Webster]

Promised faithfully to espouse his cause as soon as
he got out of the war. --Bp. Burnet.
[1913 Webster]

WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]

espouse
v 1: choose and follow; as of theories, ideas, policies,
strategies or plans; "She followed the feminist
movement"; "The candidate espouses Republican ideals"
[syn: adopt, follow]
2: take in marriage [syn: marry, get married, wed, conjoin,
hook up with, get hitched with]
3: take up the cause, ideology, practice, method, of someone
and use it as one's own; "She embraced Catholocism"; "They
adopted the Jewish faith" [syn: embrace, adopt, sweep
up]

Moby Thesaurus II by Grady Ward, 1.0 [moby-thes]

58 Moby Thesaurus words for "espouse":
accept, adopt, advocate, affiliate, allege in support, answer,
approve, argue for, assert, back, be made one, be spliced,
become one, campaign for, carry, catch, champion, contend for,
contract matrimony, counter, couple, crusade for, defend, embrace,
get hitched, go in for, intermarry, interwed, maintain,
make a plea, marry, mate, miscegenate, pair off, pass, plead for,
ratify, rebut, refute, remarry, reply, respond, rewed, riposte,
say in defense, speak for, speak up for, stand up for,
stick up for, support, sustain, take on, take to wife, take up,
uphold, urge reasons for, wed, wive



Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary [easton]

Espouse
(2 Sam. 3:14), to betroth. The espousal was a ceremony of
betrothing, a formal agreement between the parties then coming
under obligation for the purpose of marriage. Espousals are in
the East frequently contracted years before the marriage is
celebrated. It is referred to as figuratively illustrating the
relations between God and his people (Jer. 2:2; Matt. 1:18; 2
Cor. 11:2). (See BETROTH.)