Round the Bend at The Corner

This is tin-foil hat stuff, but it’s Serious Republicans who are doing it, so it’s okay:

The crowd at The Corner seems to have gone well and truly insane. It all starts when David Frum asks:

“Does anybody really seriously believe that Barack Obama is a secret left-wing radical? And if not, then what is this fuss and fury supposed to show?”

There follow a series of posts at The Corner which basically answer: yes. Jonah Goldberg:

“Well, yes. Lots of people do. For me, it depends on what you mean by “radical” …”

Mark Levin:

“How can anyone who actually follows this stuff, who reads Freddoso, Kurtz, and scores of other reliable sources of information, conclude that Obama is not some wild-eyed radical?”

Andy McCarthy:

“If you accept the premise that he was a radical, how has he changed such that he should no longer be considered a radical? Obviously, he is very smooth and he presents himself as a reasonable, moderate fellow. But that doesn’t affect substance.”

There follow several more posts, and then we get to the pièce de resistance, from McCarthy again:

“Obama’s radicalism, beginning with his Alinski/ACORN/community organizer period, is a bottom-up socialism. This, I’d suggest, is why he fits comfortably with Ayers, who (especially now) is more Maoist than Stalinist. What Obama is about is infiltrating (and training others to infiltrate) bourgeois institutions in order to change them from within — in essence, using the system to supplant the system. A key requirement of this stealthy approach (very consistent with talking vaporously about “change” but never getting more specific than absolutely necessary) is electability. With an enormous assist from the media, which does not press him for specifics, Obama has walked this line brilliantly. Absent convincing retractions of his prior radical positions, though, we should construe shrewd moves like the ostensibly reasonable Second Amendment position as efforts make him electable.This is why Ayers is so important: it is a peek behind the curtain of Obama’s rhetoric.”

Hilzoy suggests to these benighted souls that they get a grip.

7 Responses to “Round the Bend at The Corner”

  1. gcotharn says:

    NRO’s The Corner posters believe Obama is a far left person posing as a center left person. The thinking is:
    A portion of America shares Obama’s solidly-to-the-left sympathies. However, not nearly enough share those sympathies as to elect Obama. Far too much of America flatly opposes those sympathies. Therefore Obama, if he wants to get elected, is forced into falsely posing as center left.

    McCain’s drawing attention to Obama-Ayers is about drawing attention to exactly that. It raises questions in voters minds:
    Why did a far left person, Ayers, so eagerly embrace Obama?
    Why did Obama so eagerly embrace the far left Ayers?
    Might Obama and Ayers share political sympathies?
    Might Obama be a poseur?

    McCain is not trying to brand Obama as a terrorist. Only the most fringe type voters would believe such a thing. McCain is trying to brand Obama as 1) a person with enough lax judgment to be comfortable consorting with a former terrorist, 2) a poseur whose true sympathies are too far left for him to be electable.

    It baffles me that anyone accuses McCain of inferring Obama is a terrorist. It’s ridiculous to think voters would believe that; it’s ridiculous to think McCain believes voters would believe that.

  2. Kathy says:

    It baffles me that anyone accuses McCain of inferring Obama is a terrorist. It’s ridiculous to think voters would believe that; it’s ridiculous to think McCain believes voters would believe that.

    Well, obviously, there *are* voters who believe that, judging from some of the audience participation McCain and Sarah Palin have been eliciting at their speeches.

    Neither McCain nor Palin have objected to those characterizations either, or said anything to discourage them.

    You are, at best, gcotharn, incredibly naive. I don’t know how an adult can be as naive as you are and still make it through the day. Maybe you’re not an adult. You could be 12 or 13 for all we know. You can’t tell on the Internet.

  3. tas says:

    It baffles me how much of an idiot gcotharn is.

    Open. Your. Fucking. Eyes.

  4. Kathy says:

    Amen to that, tas.

  5. gcotharn says:

    This is just incredible. What the heck acts of terror do voters think Barack committed?

    Do voters think Barack has set off bombs? Has Barack shot people? Has Barack run people down with vehicles? Has Barack poisoned water systems or tampered with electrical grids? Maybe Barack has done logistics: driving terrorists to and fro, providing food, shelter, clothing, intelligence, instruction. I am seriously flummoxed. What am I missing here?

    Am I completely missing some obvious point of yours? I must be, as I don’t know what else to think. If so, please explain it as if I am six. Since I am twelve, I will understand that explanation.

    Is your use of “terrorist” a reference to persons implying that Obama is Muslim, and that the Koran says submit to Islam, or to Kuffar status, or to death, and therefore Obama must be a terrorist b/c he is a Muslim who believes we should submit or die?

    I’m stretching here. Please help me understand what the heck you are talking about. I will not rebut. I just want to understand why in the world you believe voters believe Barack is a terrorist.

  6. Kathy says:

    Gcotharn,

    His middle name is Hussein and he’s acquainted with a man who bombed buildings 40 years ago. What else do you need?

  7. gcotharn says:

    Okay, I’m trying to stay completely polite and respectful.

    Do voters think Obama has committed specific acts of terrorism? Or, do they think he’s just .. a low motivation terrorist who has yet to strike, and who is in the midst of a long term phase of terror dormancy?

    I’m experiencing cognitive dissonance, as if we are speaking different languages, as if words mean two very different things, and I have no idea of the other meaning. Maybe this is where I am lost: doesn’t one need to commit an act of terror if one is to be a terrorist?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. What McCain Doesn’t Understand About Getting the Job | Comments from Left Field - [...] shit. Note to McCain and his increasingly desperate supporters: Yammering on about ’60s radicals who 40 years later live…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect with Facebook