Absolutely Shameful Attack

October 12th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

What I am seeing reminds me too much of another destructive period in American history. Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse,” Rep. John Lewis, D-Georgia said in a statement recently.

John McCain condemned the attack immediately on Saturday calling it “a brazen and baseless attack.”

It is, of course. It is a horrible, false, shameful attack by yet another Democrat. It is, also, once again an attempt to play the race card and convince voters that Republicans / all those who oppose Obama are racist. Mr. Lewis should, as far as I am concerned, be publicly lambasted for weeks, even months for his outrageous statements. The man knows no shame.

A pathetic, pitiful, vicious attack.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. Virginia Benefield
    October 12th, 2008 at 03:42
    Reply | Quote | #1

    What took so long for the race card to be played against McCain?! No matter what issue anyone raises when it comes to a candidate of color - the caucasian sooner or later will have the race card played agianst them in America.As Americans, we have been asked to move beyond race in this country - yet it is always those from the black community that make it an issue! Look at Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright, Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and now Lewis of Georgia comaparing McCain to George Wallace just because he is bringing up Ayers! Obama is a Harvard grad - would he have us believe that he didn’t know who Ayers was?! Or that he didn’t care that this former terrorist was kicking off his political career -Or is he going to excuse it as one of his ‘bone-headed ideas!  Should we trust America, our great nation, with this type of judgement? A Harvard grad would have us believe that he sat in Wrights church for 20 years and didn’t notice that he condemed America and Israel?? Come on - Lewis’s SMEAR of John McCain is simply because McCain is revealing the real Obama to America - Oh heaven forbid that whould happen - why? - because - as the first black candidate he is not supposed to be questioned or scrutinized like every other candidate in history! 

    We are all supposed to tip-toe around and treat him like a frail child! No wonder people are angry!  Complete adoration on one side leads to complete anger on the other side.  The partisan, biased, adoring press has caused this situation.

  2. Michael Merritt
    October 12th, 2008 at 04:27
    Reply | Quote | #2

    When will these people learn that Obama is a big boy and can take care of himself?

  3. Jay_C
    October 12th, 2008 at 05:37
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Totally Agree.  There is plenty that McCain can and should criticize Obama for. (And vice versa)  At least I see McCain manning up and explaining his relationships and apologizing for things like being part of the Keating 5.  Obama does nothing of the sort, he tries to sell us a watered down version of each and every story that paints him with a negative brush, and to me, that makes him less electable.

  4. c3
    October 12th, 2008 at 08:52
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Michael;What do you mean "boy"?

  5. Kaspar
    October 12th, 2008 at 08:58
    Reply | Quote | #5

    Why does McCain still allow people to use Obama’s middle before his speeches at the rallies? Why did he allow a pastor to give an introduction that admonished christian prayers for McCain’s victory (with the added remark that hindus and other would pray for Obama)?

    "I would also add, Lord, that your reputation is involved in all that happens between now and November, because there are millions of people around this world praying to their god — whether it’s Hindu, Buddha, Allah — that his opponent wins, for a variety of reasons. And Lord, I pray that you will guard your own reputation, because they’re going to think that their god is bigger than you, if that happens. So I pray that you will step forward and honor your own name with all that happens between now and election day."

    Us v. them, only non-christians want Obama, foreigners want Obama, church and state joined together.

    How’s that for shameful? Republicans need to be crushed in this election, they need to have a nasty mark right on their foreheads reminding them of how much they need to change.

  6. Kaspar
    October 12th, 2008 at 12:16
    Reply | Quote | #6

    "George Wallace never threw a bomb," Lewis noted. "He never fired a gun, but he created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise their constitutional rights.

    McCain did too little too late. He did not explicitly say Obama was a traitor at the rallies (although he has still not retracted the pathetic claim that Obama would lose the war to win the campaign) but he did not immediately and strongly tell people that Obama is not a traitor, that he is not a terrorist and that the call for "killing" (whether it was against Obama or Ayers) is not acceptable in 21st century USA, ESPECIALLY not with an economic crisis going on.

    McCain and Palin are not behaving like politicians or statesmen, and McCain starting to tell people off for calling Obama an arab etc. seems very forced seeing as he allowed it to happen up until people rightly started to take disgust at his lack of a reaction to the negative feelings he consciously whipped up.

    Palin, who believes my mother is immoral if she aborts a fetus that was conceived from rape, is now saying Obama has extreme views on abortion. Insulate the base base, tell them they are good and fighting an unfair fight against the others. Let’s drop the IQ and resort to culture warfare.

    McCain is not an honorable man.

  7. Selin
    October 12th, 2008 at 22:05
    Reply | Quote | #7

    Obama does have extreme views on abortion. He supported legislation allowing babies to die - he thinks babies who survived an abortion attempt and who were born alive shouldn’t be fed and taken care of and should be left to die. How is that even remotely acceptable or mainstream? The baby is out of the mother’s uterus, it’s not a part of her body anymore. All of the ”feminist” arguments that I know of for being pro-choice END once the baby is OUT of her mother’s womb and in the world.

    THIS is an extreme view on abortion and it’s not a misnomer to call it “killing” babies who were born alive.

  8. Kaspar
    October 12th, 2008 at 22:54
    Reply | Quote | #8

    “He supported legislation allowing babies to die - he thinks babies who survived an abortion attempt and who were born alive shouldn’t be fed and taken care of and should be left to die.”

    Rescuable babies left to die? What say? This is certainly not acceptable in Sweden, but we do have stricter abortion legislation than most states in the US… My line is when the foetus can survive and develop healthily with the medical science available. I mean, life must be protected if it has a chance to live normally. OK, I might give that point even though I very much dislike Palin for not calling out some people when she should.

    Talking about Ayers, while probably futile, is at least discussing actual things (well, spinning conventional knowledge, but that’s expected). But not stopping people who are saying things like terrorist, accepting pastors saying you are God’s candidate before you enter a stage… That’s not negativity, and not putting gloves on. That’s taking a poisoned blade to an armwrestling game.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500