47

Rockin’ the Ahmadinejad vote


 

Well, I think he’s very thin-skinned. I think that is what was clear to me in 2000. I actually regard him as a very unpleasant man, and I don’t say that lightly. There’s a lot of politicians who are sort of angry and slightly deranged. Al Gore, for example, when you see him campaign, certainly the last couple of years, seems to have pretty much flown the coop. And when I saw Al Gore at close quarters campaigning, one could recognize the sort of human side to him. McCain, I think, is a very different kettle of fish. I think he is someone who is very thin-skinned, very vain, and has a sort of cavalier attitude to big questions, particularly Constitutional questions. So I think he is someone who in fact, the more you know him, the less you warm to the idea of having him…I said rather, I said at one point, you know, he’d be our version of President Ahmadinejad, the crazy guy with his finger on the nuclear button. And I think there’s actually quite a bit of truth in that.”

— Mark Steyn on John McCain, not recently.


 

Rockin’ the Ahmadinejad vote

  1. As usual, Mark Steyn is bang on. He’s right in his quote on McCain and he’s right about Obama. So it isn’t a U-turn Mr. Wells, a choice has to be made, and for many it’s a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea.

  2. That’s deep.

  3. “The new president [Obama] would front the fourth great wave of liberal annexation — the first being FDR’s New Deal, the second LBJ’s Great Society, and the third the incremental but remorseless cultural advance when Reagan conservatives began winning victories at the ballot box and liberals turned their attention to the other levers of the society, from grade school up. The terrorist educator William Ayers, Obama’s patron in Chicago, is an exemplar of the last model: forty years ago, he was in favor of blowing up public buildings; then he figured out it was easier to get inside and undermine them from within.”

    Wow. I think it may be Steyn himself who has “flown the coup.”

  4. “McCain vs Obama is not the choice many of us would have liked in an ideal world. But then it’s not an “ideal world”, and the belief that it can be made so is one of the things that separates those who think Obama will “heal the planet” and those of us who support McCain faute de mieux.”

    I agree with Jarrid. The quote above makes it apparent that Mark is taking a ‘lie back and think of england’ type attitude towards McCain because Obama is much, much worse. Few Repubs like McCain, they only picked him because of his Lib voting record. They thought he had the best chance of separating himself from Bush legacy.

  5. Ah, Jarrid, are you learning to sail?

  6. My favourite part was when he inferred the blame for the credit crisis onto those people with mortgages.

    The banks DID get bailed out, but the homeowners WANT to be bailed out–so they’re the baddies. Hilarious!

  7. Lie back, think of England, and vote for “the crazy guy with his finger on the nuclear button”? Because we’re afraid of another FDR or LBJ?

  8. Conservatives don’t have their choice….of course what is conservative in america today.

    The foreign policy run under 43 was anything but conservative. It cloaked itself in the garments of protecting American interests but was a surprisingly radical notion of extending american ideals by force if if necessary. Not forcing people to accept American ideals but the very passive aggressive idea of removing those who opposed it, a subtle but important difference that may explain why it may ultimately suceed but it will be a long long time before it does.

    Remember, 43 claimed he wanted a “humble” American foreign policy, more Teddy Roosevelt and that seemed to fit how he might have been schooled by 41. Goodness remember the criticism of playing nice with China over the forced down airplane, the praise 43 got for the invasion of Afghanistan, not done immeadiately, planned and done with surgical precision in a 4th generation warefare kind of way.

    Then came Iraq….it was supposed to be about protecting America, it could only ever be about that to get approval. It seems it was, sort of but never in a way imagined.

    So Bush isnt a “conservative” but then again is Steyn? Obama is in some ways, but there is lots to be wary of with him as well. It will be interesting to see what happens when a Democrat leads the US to war with a braying Republican opposition either calling him chicken for not going fast enough or alternatively calling him an internationalist for spending American blood on battles that are “humanitarian” and not cold eyed American interest.

    I am not sure where Steyn will end up. I think he will fall more into the line of fighting things and places that are only in American interest, but holding back Global Jihad is a big tent policy that will be difficult to nail down.

    McCain, despite the fact that he wanted to ensure another Vietnam never happened, and I believe him, I also think he is just a little too willing to go up a smack somone in the nose, which sometimes works but often doesnt. There is a penchant for “doubling down” that I just think needs to stop, for everyones sake as it leads to incremental escalation where you lose sight of your initial and overall strategic goals.

    Obama, he will be different, which is a virtue in and of itself. I am concerned he will feel the need to prove his toughness and be goaded into something. I am also concerned he is more concerned about “the world” rather than America. As odd as it sounds this is a big problem, because it turns expectations inside the game on their head.

    Think of labour negotiations where mgt says, well this is silly lets just cut to the chase and offer what you want rather than negotiate our way there. The result is labour doesnt trust managements sincerity, becuase they expect mgt to act in its own interest, and wont agree or two, plays its interest game and ratchets up its demands. Obama is an AMERICAN president and needs to be that, others count on it. This is part of what Steyn was saying but I think he meant it in a different way.

    At the end of the day, the American system is fraught with checks and balances and as long as Obama doesnt try to run yellow and red lights within that system then we will all be fine and the change will do us good.

  9. “The kind of self-righteous self-confidence that has become Obama’s trademark is usually found in sophomores in Ivy League colleges– very bright and articulate students, utterly untempered by experience in real world.

    The signs of Barack Obama’s self-centered immaturity are painfully obvious, though ignored by true believers who have poured their hopes into him, and by the media who just want the symbolism and the ideology that Obama represents.”

    -Thomas Sowell

    In other words, hang on to your hats – Americans are about to elect a wet-behind-the-ears marxist community organizer.

    It’ll make for interesting times.

  10. That’s why I didn’t like Obama’s convention speech. The references to farm collectivization, and nationalizing the means of production were really disturbing but nobody mentioned them afterward at all. Then he ran those ads where he promised to “run a hot iron down the spine of the Ukrainian kulaks” and nobody said boo. I blame media bias.

  11. “Kobama the Dread”

  12. That whole thing about how he was supposed to be an Arab was an excellent diversion.

  13. “That’s why I didn’t like Obama’s convention speech. The references to farm collectivization, and nationalizing the means of production were really disturbing but nobody mentioned them afterward at all.”

    You have to admit, though, his plan for “Juche, American Style” is pretty bold, particularly for a commoner not born on Baekdu Mountain.

  14. It’s actually the “skinny legs” that make him unfit for office.

  15. When challenged on his lack of experience, as in having run anything, Obama’s comeback was that running his campaign for the presidency was experience at running something.

    The media scribes furiously wrote down his answer like it was a revelation. To the non kool-aid drinkers, it confirmed that the smooth-talking neophyte was also a nonsense-talking neophyte.

  16. Paul

    You can crack wise about Obama’s disdain for Kulaks and all that but he clearly does have sympathy for extreme left ideas, his membership in the New Party proves it.

    Also, you can tell a lot about a person by the company he keeps and look at Obama’s circle of acquaintances: Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, Khalidi … etc.

    And what do you think Michelle Obama was talking about when she said this:

    “Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zone . . . Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual – uninvolved, uninformed.”

    If I was an American, Michelle’s comment would send a shiver down my spine. If that isn’t a classic fascist/extreme left comment, I don’t know what is.

  17. I agree completely with every word of jwl’s last sentence.

  18. And the sarcasm fairly drips, Mr Wells. Good on you.

  19. Also, you can tell a lot about a person by the company he keeps and look at Obama’s circle of acquaintances: Paul Volcker, Austan Goolsbee, Warren Buffett…

  20. “Also, you can tell a lot about a person by the company he keeps and look at Obama’s circle of acquaintances: Paul Volcker, Austan Goolsbee, Warren Buffett…”

    Mike M

    The people you list are little more than props. None of them have a history with Obama beyond a couple of years, right around the time that Obama needed some cover for his extreme left views, in fact. But I am sure that’s just a coincidence.

  21. “The people you list are little more than props.”

    Gosh, for a guy with no experience or ability he sure seem to be able to fool some pretty sharp people…or are you suggesting Warren Buffet is a closet Marxist too?

  22. jwl,

    With regard to the Michelle Obama quotation you note, I’d have to disagree with your interpretation.

    Her words were directed toward the segments of society who rarely do much more than complain about the failure of governments to address certain issues and problems.

    In the same way that conservative-leaning citizens have increasingly learned that shaking their fists from the margins yields almost no meaningful results, so too do the “lefties” need to learn that decisions are made by those who show up.

    Obama was speaking to the masses of self-disenfranchised – reminding them that if they really want to change how things are done, then they must be willing to get involved and work at it. I think such an ethic transcends ideology, and is one that ought to be embraced by citizens of any democratic state (I don’t think I can bear to hear one more young person proudly explain that he or she doesn’t vote because his or her issues aren’t being talked about by politicians, for example).

    As for the company Obama keeps – I don’t think McCain is looking a whole lot better these days in that respect.

  23. “The people you list are little more than props. None of them have a history with Obama beyond a couple of years, right around the time that Obama needed some cover for his extreme left views, in fact. But I am sure that’s just a coincidence.”

    Yeah, Buffett, Volcker and Goolsbee are all clueless idiots, who are providing ‘cover’ for Obama because…

    Because, why, exactly?

    But you’re right.. we need to worry about Obama following in the path of another far-leftist, by:

    – Raising government spending by 8% a year, during a period of low inflation.
    – Introducing a crushing multi-billion dollar tax on some forms of corporations.
    – Choosing the most regressive tax as the one to cut, rather than choosing tax cuts based on what would be of most benefit to the economy
    – Giving cash handouts to families, rather than cutting their income taxes.

    Obama is so leftist, his economic policy might only be *slightly* to the right of Stephen Harper!

    Seriously, guys. Pot. Kettle.

  24. You gotta hand it to the theatre critic for not indulging in cynical politics and inflicting a 2% drop on Obama’s popularity at this juncture by endorsing him.

  25. Mike M

    I didn’t say Buffett, Volcker and Goolsbee are clueless idiots. They are all left wing and are supporting the left wing candidate, no surprise there at all.

    I care more about Obama’s motives. Why did all of Obama’s radical acquaintances disappear around 2004/05, to be replaced by more mainstream lefties?

    And I too think Bush and Harper are way more liberal than conservative. As I have said many times, compassionate conservatism = fascist lite and Harper’s abandoned conservatism in order to attract liberals. That’s why I didn’t vote conservative.

    Sean S

    Interesting perspective, haven’t thought of it that way. Not sure I agree tho.

  26. Why did all of Obama’s radical acquaintances disappear around 2004/05, to be replaced by more mainstream lefties?

    A simple matter of documented history, no doubt.

    I think I’ll goad Mr. Wells into shutting down the comments again.

  27. Please don’t, Ti-Guy.

  28. Imagine – Obama is a Marxist because he has skinny legs – Arnold doesn’t like skinny legs. Obama did not take manly-man steroids and that makes him not a manly-man.

    You see, Obama pumped up the people instead of his thighs…imagine that.

    Like Bill Maher said – the socialist/Marxist/Communist thing is just so 50’s and McCarthyism.

  29. Remember all those conservative columnists and radio show hosts who were threatening to vote for Hillary Clinton?

    It took Obama to bring them back onside.

    Anyway, whatever. Lefties, enjoy Tuesday night. My side has some very stiff drinks to consume. (Scotch or vodka for election night? Decisions, decisions…)

  30. What should we make of Dick Cheney’s endorsement the other day? Mr. Cheney must of know that his endorsment would hurt McCain on the final weekend of the campaign… is this a sign of trouble within the GOP or do I need to take off my tin foil hat?

  31. The pollsters that got the U.S. election the closest last time – IBD/TIPP – numbers out today:

    Obama 46.7%
    McCain 44.6%

    Where are the undecideds in this poll?:

    Northeast 11%
    Midwest 12%
    South 6%
    West 8%

    Hmmmm.

  32. Electoral college system makes US national poll numbers even more meaningless than Canadian ones…unconceivable though that might seem.

  33. Having seen Obama’s seamless, perfect campaigning, beating Clinton and then motoring right along without missing a beat, I can’t imagine anyone more qualified to be President. He’s cool, brilliant, and if not as well educated at John F Kennedy, the last genuinely qualified person to be President, he’s a close second.

    But actually I predicted all this back in Iowa. The minute Oprah took the stage, added her imprimatur, said this black man is safe. I said it’s all over. It was. It is.

  34. Here’s a poll just for John.K:

    Mason-Dixon poll out today in Ohio, McCain +2 – 47-45.

  35. First act, Obama should extend an overture to Castro. Clinton would have gone down as one of the best presidents of all time, instead of a flake, had he only crosssed that channel. High time, and Obama said he would. Open channels, get trade going, import some cigars, export some tourists. Hit the ground running.

  36. That gave me almost as much whiplash as when Steyn hyped Stephane Dion for about 10 years, only to jump to the front of the line to slag him in the next Macleans after he blew the election. Boy that Steyn is fickle!!

  37. Ha ha, ok, but Steyn has also said many times he was supporting McCain only as the better of two options, and he was far from his ideal candidate, so I don’t really see it as a U-turn for him either.

  38. Blues Clair — Re Cheney and McCain, think Klein and Harper.

  39. The wonderful part about Tuesday is that thereafter nothing Mark Steyn says or thinks, or ever said or thought, will matter at all.

  40. That’ll depend on how liquid Regnery remains.

  41. “The wonderful part about Tuesday is that thereafter nothing Mark Steyn says or thinks, or ever said or thought, will matter at all.”

    You mean it ever mattered before?

  42. maya: “You mean [Steyn] ever mattered before?”

    Well, he and Frum and Christopher Hitchens have probably been the biggest apologists for Bush-style imperialism, and they certainly worked hard (and quite successfully, in their day) to spread the message. Funny how all three were transplanted, eh? Hitchens the Ueberbrit, Frum the ex-Canadian, Steyn the medley of all three. Somehow the crusade gave them a spiritual home, unfortunately not a Florida jail cell. But the canceling of the crusade is the canceling of Steyn’s and Frum’s and Hitchens’ context; they will linger on in darkness and in doubt, as nightfall in winter that comes without a star, bound to their grief, under the fading trees, until all the world has changed and the long years of their lives are utterly spent.

Sign in to comment.