Nathan Moore's Thoughts
The Class Card
It was only a matter of time. Obama has attacked John McCain for his wealth
. Not to say John McCain had a great answer to the question “How many houses do you have?”, but it is just this sort of class warfare now wielded by the Democrats that is more divisive than anything the Democrats even accuse the GOP of doing.
It is tiresome. See, if you are a successful individual, the Democrats will deride you, as if possessing wealth makes you somehow a bad, less worthy person. Barack Obama himself will make you suffer, both fiscally and psychologically. Democrats don’t want you to succeed, because if you succeed too much, you won’t be a Democrat anymore. Instead, you must be made to feel guilty for your success – that is the only way to keep you in the fold.
But back to the instant bad karma of Obama – Obama’s attack on McCain, noting the number of houses he owns, is completely irrelevant to anything in this presidential race. That being abundantly clear, why would Obama make an attack ad out of it?
Smoke. The issues that most matter, such as national defense and energy prices , are areas where Obama is weak. This is no more than a diversionary tactic to keep the campaign from being about substance, which is where Barack Obama flounders, repeatedly offering nothing more than empty, visionless, child-like platitudes. It is not that he is unpatriotic, as he alleges about himself, but that his regurgitated “ideas” are of the worst sort.
In a world with an expansionist-minded Russia and a Middle East which is always set to blow, Barack Obama obscures the important with the frivolous. This is his theme, and it would define his presidency.
August 21st, 2008 at 11:51 am
[...] Nathan Moore takes on Barack Obama for using class warfare in their attack on McCain’s inability to remember how much property he has: It is tiresome. See, if you are a successful individual, the Democrats will deride you, as if possessing wealth makes you somehow a bad, less worthy person. Barack Obama himself will make you suffer, both fiscally and psychologically. Democrats don’t want you to succeed, because if you succeed too much, you won’t be a Democrat anymore. Instead, you must be made to feel guilty for your success – that is the only way to keep you in the fold. [...]
August 21st, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Yes, how dare Obama introduce triviality into this campaign. Good think McCain has stuck to important topics like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.
August 21st, 2008 at 12:32 pm
think=thing
August 21st, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Basically, if you earn over 250K you are responsible to pay for the everyone’s healthcare, and retirement.
On his website Obama states he wants to “restore fairness to the tax code.”
Considering:
“the famous top 1% paid almost 40% of all income tax, a proportion that has jumped dramatically since 1986.”
AND:
“The number of people who actually get money back – not a refund, but a net payment – through the income tax system, is huge. In 2005 (the most recent year for which data is available), the bottom 40% of Americans by income had, in the aggregate, an effective tax rate that’s negative: their households received more money through the income tax system, largely from the earned income tax credit, than they paid.”
http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/31/news/economy/tax_debate.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008040211
Yes the tax code is unfair. Oh, and John McCain has 7 house. That’s unfair too.
August 21st, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Sean,Sean,Sean,Sean,Sean owning seven houses is wrong unless you are John Kerry – oh right – he didn’t own them his wife did. What’s the diff???? So big deal. I bet those seven houses are the reason many people have jobs relating to them.
Only a liberal sees a rich (not drinking the koolaid non liberal) person as evil. Obama is rich and I don’t see him as evil for being rich – he is wrong for his views for America and class envy warfare. I’m sure Obama does not see Bill Gates, Michael Moore, Babs Streisand… as evil and no telling how many massive houses they have.
Since when are those running for President $50,000 a year earners living in a $150,000 house.
Grow up liberals!
August 21st, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Also the top 5% pay 60% of all taxes, that’s people making above 145,000/yr. Not what I would call the Warren Bill Gates crowd.
August 22nd, 2008 at 9:20 am
Ann,
I never said owning 7 houses is wrong, I just find Nathan’s righteous indignation about Obama not focusing on policy to be hilarious considering his candidate has spent the past month running ads tying Obama to Paris Hilton and Moses.
In fact, I don’t really like the line of attack…McCain doesn’t own seven houses, his sugar momma does.
August 25th, 2008 at 10:16 am
Sean, you are a nasty person.
At least McCain’s “sugar momma” BOUGHT them vs BHO having a CONVICT help him get a sweetheart illegal deal.
August 25th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Ann,
Yeah, I’m the nasty one…I’m not the one who left my crippled wife for a hot beer-heiress.
As far as Obama’s deal, there wasn’t anything illegal about it. He bought a house, Rezko bought some land, and then Rezko sold that land for a profit at a later date. The owners of the home who sold it to Obama came out and said that him getting the house wasn’t contingent on Rezko buying that strip of property.
August 25th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
Same ol’, same ol’ Social Darwinist pabulum. Sure there’s a class war, but you’ve got it completely bass-ackwards.
As if Spartacus waged class warfare against patrician Rome and not vice versa.
As if Nat Turner waged class warfare against the slave owners and not vice versa.
I guess Spartacus and Nat Turner should have known their respective places?