And now the remaining 11 reasons, as authored by This
12. He associated with and made a land deal with convicted felon, Tony Rezko, even knowing he was under serious investigation. He admitted this was
what he called a boneheaded mistake. Mr. Obama seems incapable of judging his associates, as his close and friendly encounters with the hate-America
and terrorist crowd suggests. Even an otherwise friendly biographer, said he is at home with the hate-America types.
13. He claims he will bring all sides together but he has never shown any signs or symptoms of bipartisanship. His record is that of a far-left
liberal, the most liberal of any member of the U.S. Senate. He goes down the party line, and never reaches across the aisle.
14. He claims he will bring change to Washington, but picks a long-term Washington insider, Sen. Joe Biden, who has been in the Senate for decades,
and is rated the third most liberal in the U.S. Senate. He claims he’ll be the agent of change, but in his acceptance speech he catalogs the tired
left-wing Democratic agenda, that has been regurgitated every four years for decades. He talks change but dishes up only the old liberal dishes, which
have been rejected by voters many times from McGovern to Carter, and which have failed when implementation was attempted. If Mr. Obama wins the White
House, he is likely to have a veto proof Congress, which mean all of his left-loony proposals would probably become law. Electoral history suggests
Americans don’t go for such unrestrained power. Beware of an Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate that would bring us radical liberalism in its worst
15. He says he wants to bring us energy independence but refuses to drill and extract our huge reserves, greater than those of Saudi Arabia. He wants
us to check our tire pressure instead of drilling. Give me a break! He also advises everyone to tune-up their cars, even though most cars no longer
16. He never sticks with a job. For example, when he became senator he started writing his book. Then within two years of becoming a senator, he
started running for president. It is not surprising that he has no legislative accomplishments. This has been the pattern of his entire career. He
never sticks with anything long enough to chalk up significant achievements. That’s why when asked about his accomplishments, his supporters seem to
be stumped. Dean Barnett, in an article in the Weekly Standard (Sept. 1, 2008), entitled “Would You Hire Barack Obama? The resume of a chronic
underachiever,” writes, “You’d have to conclude that Obama’s failure to commit himself to any career sufficiently to excel at it suggests some
unexplained restlessness.” I’d say it suggests he’s a dilitante, who flits from one project to another, but never stays long enough to deliver a
satisfactory end product.
17. As talk show host Michael Medved has pointed out, the people vouching for him at the Democratic National Convention were mainly relatives, such as
his wife and brother-in-law. There were not major figures vouching for him, because they could not vouch for a classic empty-suit. Even Hillary
Clinton, in her convention endorsement speech, said Democrats must support him, but in no way vouched for his character or judgment. Contrast that
with the people at the Republican National Convention who vouched for Sen. McCain - Sen. Joe Lieberman and former Sen. Fred Thompson.
18. To bolster his foreign policy credentials, he picked Sen. Joe Biden as vice president. Sen. Biden voted for the war in Iraq, which vote Sen. Obama
views as the symbol of bad judgment. So even Sen. Obama admits Sen. Biden ha bad judgment. Sen. Biden also comes up with wacky ideas of his own such
as splitting Iraq, a sovereign nation, into three parts for the Kurds, Shias, and Sunnis. He also voted against the first Gulf War, even after Iraq
had invaded Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Middle East. I’d think most would consider that the height of bad judgment. He
opposed the surge. He opposed Reagan’s build-up to fight international communism, so his bad record is long and unbroken. Biden has judgment bad
enough to match that of Sen. Obama’s.
19. He flip-flops on matters that suggest he has no principles except the old Chicago machine principle of do anything you have to do to get elected.
He promised to take public financing, something that the great reformer and change artist claimed to be committed to. Then when he saw it was to his
political advantage to stay with totally private contributions, as that would bring in more money, he went back on his promise and rejected public
funding. He said that his wide array of contributors to his campaign made his approach into public financing, one of his more nonsensical pieces of
logic. He think if he uses sufficient oratorical powers he can make two and two equal ten, or private financing equal public financing.
20. He constantly uses such expressions as, “I would be glad to debate my opponent on that issue anytime, anywhere.” But that is just for
oratorical effect. In practice, he refused Sen. McCain’s offer of a town meeting every week to debate the issues. He is clearly afraid of unscripted
sessions. If he is not smart enough to go off the teleprompter and script, he is not smart enough to be president.
When he participated in the Saddleback debate with Pastor Rick Warren, he demonstrated again he doesn’t make sense when confronted with tough
questions without the answers on a script. When asked when does life begin, he said that was above his pay-grade. If that question is above his pay
grade so is the presidency of the United States.
21. He would like voters to view him as a man of great political courage, but he has a documented record of political cowardice. For example, when in
the Illinois legislature, he voted “present” over 100 times and was well known for taking that route, of neither a yes or no vote. Present is a
classic sitting on the fence and waiting to find out which way the wind will blow. As William Kristol of the Weekly Standard (Sept. 1, 2008) has
pointed out, ” Has he shunned the easy path or broken with the conventional liberal pieties of those around him? Has he taken on his own party on a
major issue? Nope.”
22. Mr. Obama bases his campaign on his superior judgment, and that in turn is based on his speech against the war in Iraq. Of course, he never made a
vote against the war, as at the time he was in the Illinois legislature, not the U.S. Senate. He gave the speech at an anti-war rally in the liberal
Hyde Park section in Chicago. But votes are more important than speeches. And since he’s been in the Senate, he’s been wrong on every issue
related to Iraq. These mistaken positions were summed up in an article by Emery in the Weekly Standard (Sept.1, 2008) entitled “Misfortunes of War:
Success in Iraq Confounds the Democrats.” It isn’t easy to be wrong on every vote and pronouncement on Iraq, but don’t underestimate Sen.
Obama’s ineptness in the foreign policy area. Mr. Emery writes: “He claimed that the Anbar Awakening took place as a result of Democrats’
congressional victories, but it began in September 2006, two months before before the voting took place. He opposed not only the troop surge, but also
the strategic changes that took place along with it, that did so much to enable the victory. He said the American military had noting to do with the
Anbar Awakening or with the retreat of the Sadr militia, something denied by the Iraqi military and by the Iraqi Sunnis themselves. He was also wrong
in his predictions that none of this would occur.”
Sen. Obama not only has judgment bad enough to make him wrong on every foreign policy question, but he also has the knack of picking advisors and
close associates who have a strong record of being wrong. For example, his choice for vice president, Sen. Biden, and one of the senators that
accompanied him on his trip to Iraq, Sen. Chuck Hagel, introduced a resolution in opposition to the buildup that was the surge that turned the tide in
Sen. Obama’s inexperience in foreign policy is perhaps his most dangerous deficiency. But don’t underestimate his ability to wreck our economy,
destroy the incentives for entrepreneurs to take risks and build jobs, and to wreck our health care delivery system.
[edit on 10/29/2008 by TheRooster]