Obama insults his supporters' intelligence
Yes, this is another post about Obama's stance on telecom immunity. No, I am not encouraging anyone, including myself, to vote for Mcain instead.
But Obama's response to the anti-immunity group on his blog is transparently misleading and underestimates the intelligence of many of his supporters. (Many of us against telecom immunity are not as far left as the media would lead you to believe. I'm center-left. )
Here is Glenn Greenwald's assessment: http://utdocuments.blogspot.com/2008/07/obamas-new-statement-on-fisa.html
And for those of you that say, "hey, at least he took the time to address those who oppose his view". Has communicating with the electorate become so rare that it is now considered an indulgence for a politician to go out of his way to talk to voters?
That's ridiculous.
The more Obama, or any other politician, is asked to explain his or her positions, to justify his or her points of view, the more transparent that justification becomes.
Thus, a position either holds up under scrutiny and is reinforced with logic, reason and fact, or a position doesn't.
Obama's response to his supporters is coherent and presents some good points, but in some ways, his response is transparently misleading. And that is what outrages me the most.
Too many politicians are only one talking point deep. When they try to explain themselves, they can't.
I don't believe Obama strengthens his chances of winning this election by weakening his positions.
The democrats are already perceived as spineless.
But Obama's response to the anti-immunity group on his blog is transparently misleading and underestimates the intelligence of many of his supporters. (Many of us against telecom immunity are not as far left as the media would lead you to believe. I'm center-left. )
Here is Glenn Greenwald's assessment: http://utdocuments.blogspot.com/2008/07/obamas-new-statement-on-fisa.html
And for those of you that say, "hey, at least he took the time to address those who oppose his view". Has communicating with the electorate become so rare that it is now considered an indulgence for a politician to go out of his way to talk to voters?
That's ridiculous.
The more Obama, or any other politician, is asked to explain his or her positions, to justify his or her points of view, the more transparent that justification becomes.
Thus, a position either holds up under scrutiny and is reinforced with logic, reason and fact, or a position doesn't.
Obama's response to his supporters is coherent and presents some good points, but in some ways, his response is transparently misleading. And that is what outrages me the most.
Too many politicians are only one talking point deep. When they try to explain themselves, they can't.
I don't believe Obama strengthens his chances of winning this election by weakening his positions.
The democrats are already perceived as spineless.
