Literally:
When we got home tonight, this was sitting on the mat right in front of our front door. Of my home. Where my wife and I (and someday my kids) sleep. In my suburban neighborhood. It kind of looks like they stuck it to my door, but it fell off. Also, my third yard sign was stolen from along the back fenceline of our property. (Fortunately, I have some extras, and will go right on putting them up until the election. And weirdly, they leave the one in my front yard alone.) Sadly, it also means someone probably had their car vandalized, at least in as much as the little thugs ripped off the sticker from a car.
“Black Power.” Lovely. Jeremiah Wright would be proud.
I know this is probably just some kids. It’s not Obama political operatives. The vandals probably aren’t even old enough to vote. If for some reason Barack Obama heard about this, I’m sure he would condemn the politics of negativity with some flowery language.
But still. It makes me very, very angry. And not just with the perps.
I can’t help but to associate this thing with the campaign of a candidate who sat in a racist church for 20 years. I can’t help but to be angry with the candidate who came to my state and told his supporters to “get in the faces” of Republicans. I can’t help but to wonder how this is any different than threatening criminal prosecution against people who run ads that are unfavorable to you, or openly urging your followers to shout down a critic, and wonder how Obama could condemn this and not those things. I can’t help but to see the scattered, similar news stories, wonder how many other minor acts of hate, violence, and trespass have occurred. I wonder if this kind of behavior abates after the election – or do these kinds of people get even bolder if Obama wins?
Tomorrow morning I’ll report it to the police, and to the local campaign headquarters. In the meantime, to the thugs out there, well done. You’ve helped widen America’s divisions just a little bit more today.
I’m sure Mr. Hope and Change himself would be very proud.
None of this would have happened if George W. Bush hadn’t done his best to alienate so many and to disenfranchise so many voters. These are the profits of corruption.
To the wall.
George W. Bush disenfranchising voters caused kids to tear down political lawn signs?
When my brother was in junior high, he and his buddies got caught by the cops for the same thing. That was in 1992. I always thought it was just kids being stupid. Apparently, they were just pro-actively speaking up for people who would be dissatisfied sixteen years later.
So I guess once again, “Thanks Bush” for the malevolence levied by ostensibly punk kids spewing hate at my front door. Wonder how long it will be before people stop blaming President Bush for EVERYTHING. By the way, early voting, which seeks to make voting as easy as possible and less congested, arose under the Bush administration, but I know I won’t hear anyone thanking the administration for that, even though the administration had just as much to do with early voting as it did the previously, and arguably poor, mechanisms for voting in each state.
I happen to know that “AMadrone” was kidding.
What’s sad is that the comment isn’t instantly recognizable as sarcastic irony, because the hippies really do say this kind of thing with a straight face so often.
“Are you being sarcastic, dude?”
“I don’t even know anymore.”
I think AMadrone makes his point effectively, regardless.
On a lighter note, I like that you and Alicia have conversations through your blog 🙂
I understand your frustration though. I was sign waving for an attorney in our office who is running for a judge on the superior court and I was flipped off by someone driving by. I mean, I understand that politics can be a very polarizing topic, but to go out of your way to not just express your view, but to attack someone else for having a different view (either through a rude gesture or vandalism)? That’s just dangerous and very scary.
Man, sorry that happened.
I was with you on your post until the last line. I am confident that Senator Obama would condemn this sort of tactic himself and inside his campaign there has been every effort to prevent such aggressive attacks. Both sides of this election have gotten heated, and individuals outside of the campaigns have acted in ugly ways. I don’t blame McCain for the words spoken at his campaign by the nutty few, and I don’t think Obama should be either.
Overall, I have been disappointed in the campaign. I thought Obama and McCain were both the kind of politicians that could deliver a more highminded campaign. Obama has not delivered the “new politics” he promised, though he has run an incredibly effective “old politics” campaign.
Senator McCain will regret listening to his advisors and running a negative campaign in the final months. Overall, his move to the social right in the last four years has hurt him. If he ran his 2000 campaign after the primaries I think he might have beaten Obama. Instead he has appealed to the base base of the social right, and has alienated the middle/right, who are moving towards Obama’s moderate economic policies. The fear mongering of the social right aside, Obama will be good for the economy, good for business, good for the military, and good for America’s standing in the world.
Ben – whether you’re talking about this McCain, or the 2000 McCain, the republicans have not nominated anyone this moderate since at least Gerald Ford, maybe Ike.
If McCain has alienated the middle, it’s because he and the media have ignored the above historical context and have allowed his marxist opponent to fraudulently present himself as a moderate.
Seriously, the idea that Obama is a moderate and it’s really John McCain that is the extremist is laughable.
Also, I’m not too concerned about doing what it takes to improve America’s standing in the world. If that were a serious policy goal, we’d elect a socialist president who believes the State is the new religion….oh, wait….
I sure hope you are right about Sen. Obama, Ben, because chances are, he will be the next president. I just wish I knew how he is going to govern. And I hope he keeps his promise on not raising taxes on the middle class, but his scant political record does not reassure me. And I hope he actually exempts small businesses from his $250K plus tax increase, like he said he would in the debate. I hope he doesn’t side with Palestine over Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East besides Iraq. I hope his plan to sit down with our enemies doesn’t lead to them lying to his face and him believing them. Finally I hope he doesn’t plan on pulling out of Iraq before the Iraqies can secure themselves and that he doesn’t agree with Barney Frank, that military spending needs to be cut 25%. If all my hopes and wishes come true, then I agree, Sen. Obama may be good for America.
McCain has had a tough set of political cards handed to him. How does he run a successful campaign when Bush is so deeply unpopular with the vast majority of America and we are in the midst of an economic meltdown that is directly harming the middle class?
All of your concerns seem not to be coming from Obama’s words, proposals or advisors, but only from his political opponents and conservative news outlets. Obama’s policy proposals are entirely reasonable. The tax hike on poor Joe the Plumber? Based on actual numbers, actually a tax cut. But even based on Joe’s numbers, the tax raise would be $900. Hardly enough to decrease the incentives to start your own business.
Obama’s policies are essentially a return to the Clinton era tax regime. Slightly more progressive? Yes. Socialism? No. McCain is out of ideas and needs to dust off the bogeymen of forgotten eras. He sent Palin (another sign of McCain’s sellout to the social right) to accuse Obama of consorting with terrorists (Ayers, now a professor at the moderately conservative UofChicago). Now he is trying out Socialist, a label that won’t stick. My guess is McCain will accuse Obama of helping out the British Redcoats next.
As for the foreign policy concerns “The Wife” raised, they also have little to do with what Obama has said or his advisers have proposed. Israel is going to remain an important ally. Diplomacy will no longer take a backseat to ideology and assumption, and the military will continue to get its funding – the latest I heard is that Gates will stay on for a while as Sec of Defense, and then Hagel after that. Hardly Dennis Kucinich.
But what do I know, I am a East Coast Liberal Elitist who likes his arugula and doesn’t know or understand real America.
I am headed home to Michigan to do poll monitoring. It is great to have such enthusiasm for the election – having young people excited about politics is a good thing, no matter what your political stripe is.
By the way, I also think it is great you guys communicate by blog. After I’m done I am going to facebook my mom and twitter my grampa.
Ben, if you’re disapointed in Obama the Campaigner, wait until he’s Obama the President. (The last line was sarcasm. But I don’t think Obama would be as troubled by it personally as you hope. No one who could stomach to be in the same room as Bill Ayers or Jeremiah Wright would have the slightest compuction about my li’l ol’ bumper sticker.)
It’s amusing to me that people look at his “plan” and think they can take it at face value. Every Obama statement comes with an expiration date. Every single one.
If you want to know what people will do in the future, look what they have done in the past. Obama has:
– Never proposed a tax cut bill;
– Never voted in favor of lower taxes;
– Consistently voted in favor of higher government spending;
– Never suggests what line items he think should be cut from the budget to save money, nor has he proposed such cuts as a Senator;
– Promised to take federal campaign funds, and then didn’t;
– Consistently made statements which find equivilancy between Israeli self-defense and Palestinean aggression (much like he initially did with Russia and Georgia);
– Voted consistently to surrender in Iraq;
– Threatened criminal prosecution for political advesaries;
– Voted consistently along the most extreme left wing party line;
– Never, ever, ever challenged his own party’s leadership on ANYTHING that might have been a political risk.
Now look at the McCain/Palin RECORD (not their plans, which I take with an equally large grain of salt):
– No earmarks as a Senator;
– Consistently been a fighter of wasteful spending;
– 1/2 Billion dollars vetoed as governor;
– Attacked corrupt but powerful members of their own party;
– Insisted that once we on the ground in Iraq, we shoudl win it;
– Understood instantly in Russia v. Georgia who was the aggressor and who was the victim. Likewise with Israel v. Hamas/Hezbollah/Iran/PLO;
– In Palin’s case, grew her state’s economy with tax AND spending cuts;
– Both have an extremely moderate record on social issues as implemented by government (as opposed to Obama);
– Etc.
MY concerns don’t come from Obama’s plans (which are NEVER fully implemented upon inaguration anyway, and in any event in his case are built upon pure fantasy) – they come from his record and his history. My ONLY hope is that he realizes, like Bill Clinton did, that in order to hold on to power he needs to turn sharply right and govern accordingly.
Ben, do you also feed your children (or plan on feeding your children) brie for breakfast? 🙂
The whole point of my post is yes, you are right in that Sen. Obama is passing himself off as moderate in his “plans,” but my concern is what he will actually do in office, with a democratic congress, and every liberal interest group pushing him this way and that way.
And the proposition of sitting down with our enemies came directly from Sen. Obama himself (even though he denied it at the debate), not the McCain campaign or conservative media outlets. Sen. Obama’s record and associations matter, more so than his “plan.” (Of course there are many things that I think are a bad idea that are contained in his “plan” too).