Why we can't "Get over it": Threats from Obama cultists
The above video clip, which you may have seen elsewhere, chronicles the threats and smears against Paula Abeles, a prominent Hillary backer who has turned to McCain.
We will return to the subject of Obot death threats shortly. First, let's look at this ABC News story. It seems that Obama made some outrageous comments when meeting with female members of the Congressional Black Caucus. These words went out to Hillary voters (not all of whom are women, incidentally):
"If women take a moment to realize that on every issue important to women, John McCain is not in their corner, that would help them get over it."
CANNON'S LAW:When a political opponent tells you "Get over it" -- NEVER GET OVER IT.
Obama went on to say that there needed to be "healing on both sides" -- as though he had any cause to feel injured.
Obama then said two sources at the meeting said that he'd held his tongue many times during the campaign against Clinton in the interest of party unity and sensitivity. Clinton and her allies had suggested he was a Muslim, had said he wasn't qualified to be president.
This passage may be poorly written, but the meaning is clear enough. Obama wants us to believe that Clinton and her allies had spread the Muslim smear. This accusation a lie. Neither Clinton nor anyone on her team has ever said such a thing.
Obama is the one who must apologize. He has lied repeatedly. His surrogates falsely accused the Clintons of racism. His team of bloggers smeared the Clintons in every conceivable way. (Never doubt that Obama had complete control over those blogs.)
Obama has done nothing -- nothing -- to make his savage followers behave like civilized human beings. His thugs -- hiding, as always, behind a cowardly veil of anonymity, have threatened my life. (I'm looking at you, my friend in Glendale with the IP address of 188.8.131.52.) And I'm hardly the only one to operate under threat.
In the video above, Paula Abeles tells her story. The O-Beasts sneer that she has not provided proof -- as though any evidence would ever suffice to convince a fanatic of something he does not care to believe. History is all the proof we need -- and the Obama cultists have, by this point, amassed quite a sordid history.
“African-American superdelegates are being targeted, harassed and threatened,” said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), a superdelegate who has supported Clinton since August. Cleaver said black superdelegates are receiving “nasty letters, phone calls, threats they’ll get an opponent, being called an Uncle Tom.
“This is the politics of the 1950s,” he complained. “A lot of members are experiencing a lot of ugly stuff. They’re not going to talk about it, but it’s happening.”
Believe it or not, I've been called a racist for trying to publicize Cleaver's warning! In fact, the ones crying "Uncle Tom" are the true racists.
Back in February, talk show host Tavis Smiley put on a "State of the Black Union" event in New Orleans. Hillary showed up; Obama sent his regrets. Smiley offered a very mild public criticism of Obama. Guess what happened?
"There's all this talk of hater, sellout and traitor," Smiley said to me in a telephone interview. Smiley even mentioned getting death threats, but wouldn't elaborate. He said his office has been flooded with angry e-mails. "I have family in Indianapolis. They are harassing my momma, harassing my brother. It's getting to be crazy," Smiley said.
John Fund, a conservative propagandist who has asked asked whether Obama practiced Islam in Indonesia, says that he has had his "life threatened."
Hillary-supporting Philadelphia radio talker Steve Corbett attained nation-wide attention when he turned against Obama. Guess what happened to him?
In the thousands of emails I’ve received in the year that “Corbett” has been on the air, I have not received a single death threat - until yesterday.
“We will kill you when Obama become PRESIDENT OF USA.,” the email reads. “You would see!!!”...
What makes this threat to kill me all the more mysterious is that it appears to have been sent through Barack Obama’s official campaign website – barackobama.com – the website that sends me official announcements of Obama’s campaign comings and goings.
The emails I’ve been receiving daily about my unwavering support for Hillary Clinton, including a particularly nasty one yesterday from an Obama volunteer in Wilkes-Barre, have become increasingly aggressive.
So have some of the calls to my show.
Now somebody has gone too far.
Let's not forget Donna Brazile's lovely offering:
Donna Brazille came right out and on a talk show with Maureen Dowd if Obama does not get the nomination “there will be blood.” She is also defending the Rev. Wright by saying an attack on him is an attack on the black church.
On Barack Obama's blog, the following words were posted vis-a-vis Hillary Clinton:
Just slit her throat, lock her in a car boot, and drive the car into river in West Virginia.
Ain’t gonna let no whore screw with the man
As regular readers know, I called the Secret Service when an Obot published the following threats against Hillary on Daily Kos:
And a Drive-By Won't Be Out of the Question. What goes around, comes around. The stupid fucking bitch !!
Talk About WHITE TRASH that bitch better keep looking over her shoulder.
Moulitsas never deleted those words, although he (or his underlings) were very quick to remove pro-Hillary sentiment. Amusingly, some Kossacks have had the audacity to criticize the level of discourse at No Quarter!
It's not enough for Barack Obama to issue a pro forma denunciation of the threats and lies issued by his vile acolytes. He must explain why his is the only campaign in the history of the Democratic party to arouse such thuggish language and behavior.
I do not recall another campaign or its supporters behaving in such a repugnant, threatening manner. What is it about Barack Obama that brings out this hatred and viciousness in people? I repeat: I have never seen anything like this. It is deplorable. I am appalled that Obama has done NOTHING about this widespread behavior. (Media, if you are reading: The stories we could tell you would make you appalled at what we have had to deal with — direct threats as well as slander. It is hard to live in fear for one’s life simply because of our political views — what kind of country is this becoming?! If this is what “hope” and “change,” bring, GOD help us all.)
Barack Obama is the single most disgusting individual in the modern history of the Democratic Party. I, for one, will never "get over it."
This is off topic but what do you think about the musings of "Lame Cherry" below concerning Larry Sinclair: "...Now ask yourself, if you are Larry Sinclair and there is no legal way you can get your hands on Barack Obama's phone records which Obama is hiding in connection with murdered Don Young and the vanishing limo driver who brought Sinclair and Obama together, what is one of the easiest ways to gain access to that information than a court order? What court order could this be? Well, Larry Sinclair knows that 3 Obama operatives are online bragging they got Mr. Sinclair arrested. They phoned the DC police and literally stalked Mr. Sinclair and provided a visual identification that Mr. Sinclair just "happened" to put on his blog before the press club meeting. Next, instead of the DC police, the Feds swooped in and took custody of Mr. Sinclair......all an apparent violation of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution as Delaware or Colorado were not even bothering with seeking extradition for Mr. Sinclair where his warrants were outstanding. So this means someone in the Federal government violated protocols as they have no business in getting involved in a state matter for petty matters. The best part of this is for Mr. Sinclair is they then moved him from the District of Columbia, into Maryland which has nothing to do with this case which is supposed to be a Delaware warrant. Liberals when this is going on with terrorists call it kidnapping. The reader can decide as a judge will if Mr. Sinclair's attorneys start filing subpoenas in this for the following counts of what is shaping up as a criminal conspiracy of the Obama operatives and Federal officials to stalk and imprison with kidnapping one Lawrence Sinclair.
Questions now are raised in who in the Federal government was monitoring this to send in officers to take into custody Mr. Sinclair who has not broken federal laws. Delaware and Colorado both knew of Mr. Sinclair and could have cared less about his petty offenses. Whether the Obamaniacs know it or not, they are the plumbers in an Obamagate who just landed this entire fiasco back onto Barack Obama with the courts opening up everything he has just like in Watergate.
Payoffs, faked lie detector tests, murdered choir directors and now a literal Federal conspiracy involving what is termed French bloggers and an American blogger to stalk and imprison Mr. Sinclair. If the Federal zealot who grabbed Mr. Sinclair is found without merit as this was not a federal matter, then there is a fact of kidnapping.
All of that adds up to a horrendous catastrophe and as stated if Mr. Sinclair knew his being dragged into the courts would gain him access as his past maneuvers have shown, then it will be Barack Obama's own people who bring him down as they have just opened all avenues of defense to Mr. Sinclair and his attorneys to all of these records as one apprehension links all of the parts together.
Now who looks like the bright boy? Yes Larry Sinclair does look quite intelligent now and if his attorneys are one bit the savvy they appear to be, the Obamaniacs walked right into this in one of the best chess moves ever carried out.
Barack Obama in his public directions has stated he had hundreds of operatives doing such work and they have been attacking Mr. Sinclair. The chickens have come home to roost and there is no way Senator Obama is going to cover this up when the courts get involved as if he starts violating court orders that is contempt and if he starts legal maneuvers the voting public will really start focusing on this in what he is really hiding."
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
posted by Anonymous : 10:30 AM
On June 16th, Ben Smith at politico.com bannered "From Jeffersons vs. Hemingses to McCain vs. Obama" and wrote about Paula Abeles:
A key organizer of John McCain's meeting Saturday with former supporters of Hillary Clinton is best known for her role in another bitter American fight: The effort by some white descendants of Thomas Jefferson to keep his possible African-American descendants out of family gatherings.
Paula Abeles emailed Politico yesterday to complain that her group had gotten short shrift in a blog item, writing, "I initiated the teleconference with McCain on Saturday and was solely responsible for the guest list." Another Clinton backer at the event, Will Bower, confirmed that she was "integral" to assembling the group.
But Abeles first made the news in 2003, when she and her husband, then-Monticello Association President Nat Abeles, led the fight to keep members of the Hemings family -- descendants of Jefferson slave and, some historians believe, mistress Sally Hemmings -- out of a gathering of the Monticello Association, which is made up of lineal descendants of the third president.
Abeles drew national attention for her role in an episode of online espionage.
The AP reported in May of 2003:
The wife of a Thomas Jefferson family association official said Friday that she masqueraded as a 67-year-old black woman on an Internet chat room in a bid to keep descendants of a reputed Jefferson mistress out of this weekend's family reunion.
"It might have been somewhat unethical," said Paulie Abeles of Washington, D.C., who participated for eight months in the Yahoo! message board created for relatives of Jefferson slave Sally Hemings.
"It might have been childish, but I really think I was working in the best interest of the majority of the family members to make the reunion a calm and civilized gathering," she said.
McCain's spokesman wouldn't comment on Abeles' history, but an aide speaking on the condition of anonymity downplayed her role, saying she was one of many Clinton supporters who brought people to the Virginia event Saturday, but wasn't the only one to do so.
"We typically don’t vet people who are simply expressing an interest in supporting the campaign, but the campaign will evaluate the policy to assure that appropriate steps are being taken," the aide said.
Abeles' political contributions list her and Nathaniel Abeles as a resident of Derwood, MD and Bethlehem, CT. She initially emailed Politico to complain that her group's members were described as less than prominent, and didn't respond to a follow-up email. She has signed her given name on a pro-Clinton chat board as "Paulie," the name she was quoted under in 2003."
posted by Anonymous : 10:47 AM
What amazed me (since I'm past being surprised at their tactics) was that their level of tone-deafness extends to not recognizing that the phrase "Get over it" might just carry some baggage for CBC members. They've only been hearing it since 2000. "She seemed to latch onto that." Ya think?! I'm not sure I would have been able to restrain myself had I been in that room. "Biting his tongue" my a$$.
In my rovings this am, I saw mention that his lack of leadership on FISA is not going over well at Casa de Cheeto. I can't stomach going there, but I saw a quote that recognizes our right to schadenfreude. They still don't get that being right doesn't mean a whole lot if you can't prevent the colossal pile-up you see coming. Maybe NOW we can convince them the nomination isn't final, and they can still back this up...
Another thing you might want to check out is the abrupt and brutal break between Rural Votes and Al Giordano's the Field. I haven't been able to wander thru the whole story yet, but RV deleted a couple of AGs posts because they referenced old radicals' organizing methods, freaking that the campaign was trying to steer away from those associations. B Crimmins seems to think RV is off the reservation in thinking they speak for the campaign on this, but, even if it's not official, the theme fits, now doesn't it? If interested, the censored post(s) appear here: http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/uncensored-the-narrative-is-not-a-story-technology
The new link for the Field is there, where a link to Crimmins' post is up (I think he's the only one that had any substantive comment on the break), and Al publishes the frantic e-mails.
posted by BQ : 10:52 AM
Disclaimer: It's inexcusable.
Previous political campaigns didn't have much DSL/cable broadband, wi-fi, or a grown GenX/Y cohort. You think you can repeal Gresham's Law?You're starting to sound like Claude Rains.
posted by Anonymous : 11:07 AM
You are on fire! Excellent commentary, my friend.
Last night before bedtime, I had been reading the ABC News story about Obama's meeting with Congressional Black Caucus members and the "get over it" line on which Rep. Watson confronted Obama. Well, Mr. Audacity didn't take too kindly to being challenged. His response went a step further, as you noted, when he stated there needed to be healing on both sides, which was a push back against Watson's objection to "get over it." He did not validate her complaint, take responsibility for his words, or explore why his phrase irritated her, which would have been the course of a person interested in unity and peacemaking... but instead he deflected her criticism, further agitating the perception of his "dismissive, off-putting" words, to make her criticism about him into his complaint -- healing needed on "both sides."
The Muslim smear is bollocks. Attached to this story, I read it as spin, pseudo-damage control to deflect how poorly Obama handled the situation.
He needs to apologize and STFU. But I won't hold my breath for that to come to pass. PUMA (party unity my ass)!
What this shows me is Obama lacks the skill and maturity to diffuse a negative situation but instead tends to escalate hostilities. And this with members of the Black Caucus. Wow! He dislikes having his authority questioned, in this instance Rep. Diane Watson.
I am not an academic or professional expert on the female psyche but as a lesbian with decades of experience with straight and lesbian women and their behaviors, some women when dismissed, intimidated, or called down enough times, will sometimes go stealth and quietly express their anger, e.g., in a safe place like the secrecy of a polling booth.
I was not aware of the threats and vitriol aimed at Paula Abeles. I hope she has engaged the authorities to investigate anyone making violent threats against her children or her that qualify as criminal terrorist threats, a law that existed long before 9/11. There are consequences for threatening someone with physical harm and Abeles can press charges should that happen. And there is defamation, slander, and/or libel if such meet the legal tests.
I hope she has documented threats of violence if any in a fashion that provides evidence to the police. This kind of thuggery needs to stop and arresting the offenders might help make it stop. The same is true for any of us who receive threats of violence. Document thoroughly and contact the police. I'm not kidding.
I'm not an attorney but I suspect the statute may vary state to state.
Also a comment by Bryan on this thread explained how ISPs can ban offensive, abuse visitors' access to the Internet with a forensics trail to prove who said what, when, where... a reason Bryan doesn't ban or delete non-commercial comments that he can use for documentation to lodge a complaint. If a person uses a business or edu computer, one can contact the business or educational institution directly and complain with adequate forensics. FYI.
if I was a republican strategist, I would hire a little army (around 100?) of bloggers that I would send to pro-Hillary and pro-Obama blogs to pose as "anti-Obama/Hillary" and piss off the other side.
It wouldn't take a lot of people and it doesn't cost a lot, just a lot of fake blogger accounts / persona and some time to loose pretending to be from the other side. Since most blogger have some narcissistic tendency, it wouldn't be difficult to drive them "foaming at the mouth" mad about the "other camp" with easy insults. And after they are mad, they stop to look with a rational mind, they look with their "ego mind"...
It would be enough to make the most narcissistic among them vote for McCain instead of the "other camp" in order to punish them.
The sad part is that strategy wouldn't work with Republicans, that might explain why they were elected more than Democrats since WW2.
What is in your psyche that you are projecting onto Obama? You have said that "all Obama supporters are psychotic." I'm not psychotic so that disproves your statement right there. And since Obama is leading McCain in the polls I guess there are a lot of psychotics. Now Obama has "complete control" over the blogs.You hold Obama responsible for anonymous comments. You have falsely suggested that the special prosecutor is targeting Obama, without any evidence.You have banned old friends from your site.
I would not put too much stock in what Paula Abeles had to say on Fox. Do you know who she is? Interesting history. I am not sure Hillary would want her as a supporter.
"The wife of a Thomas Jefferson family association official said Friday that she masqueraded as a 67-year-old black woman on an Internet chat room in a bid to keep descendants of a reputed Jefferson mistress out of this weekend's family reunion."
Thanks again Joseph. Your historical insights and writing are incredible. I have followed your blog off and on for about a year, but in the last 2 months I have found it indispensable. It's the first blog I come to every day and it has helped introduce me to the Pumas and Justsayno people. We are not alone. Thank you for your courage.
posted by Anonymous : 1:16 PM
Nor will I. And I have a serious problem believing that the democratic leadership don't know what is going down. Since some of them got threats for supporting Clinton, they surely know what is happening out here in the "real world."
So I have a very serious problem understanding why the SD's are supporting this fraud. I refuse to believe that they really think he is better qualified. That would take the height of stupidity. I can't find one single reason for their refusal to get that Clinton has a much better chance of winning in November. What are they so afraid of? What does Obama have on them that they are afraid is going to get out? It can't really be the money. Obama's May figures are way down. And the DNC damn well knows that we aren't contributing to them because of what they've done. Their are many big Clinton donors that would be filling the DNC coffers if they felt the process were fair.
So someone please tell me - what is REALLY going on here? What is Barrack Obama really holding over the dem leaders head to get their support?
I second CognitiveDissonance's question: "So someone please tell me - what is REALLY going on here? What is Barrack Obama really holding over the dem leaders head to get their support?"
I've been wondering about this ever since I realized that Obama doesn't just have less experience than every other candidate -- he actually has NO experience.
It honestly didn't occur to me that although he is a lawyer, he never tried a case. That although he was the President of his Law Review, he didn't contribute any articles. That he'd never really held a full time job.
Why didn't any of the other candidates point out these facts?
What did he offer the Super Delegates to get their endorsements?
I'm used to being on the losing side of a campaign -- but I've always been able to understand how and why it happened before.
Obama has lost nearly all major states and lost nearly every primary since March. But that didn't have any effect at all on Super Delegate endorsements.
Why? I'm totally confused. Anger and resentment aside, I can't possibly get over it until I understand it.
He makes you forget this debauched and dissolute Congress (except for Russ). Hey, did you hear Scotty say "irregardless" while under oath yesterday? Seriously, what do you think about Roger Clemens as VP?
posted by Anonymous : 7:58 PM
What is REALLY going on here?
In this thread, three of us have posed this question; no answers--not even speculation.
I was, in raising this question near the top of the thread, actually expecting to get some ideas, to hear what others, including Joseph were thinking about this, and to consider them (more in my mind than "out loud") vis-a-vis my understanding which has greatly developed in the last seven or so years.
24 hours of crickets chirping.
I can offer two articles which introduce aspects of the broader worldwide crisis in which we are struggling. I could, in fact offer a hundred articles (I have a two-yard long shelf of printouts with my margin notes, etc. which I have been accumulating over the years. No more than a half-inch of it could be described as nutty conspiracy theories; such have long since been considered and weeded out.)
Consider the broader context of this U.S. presidential election in the context of what's going on in the world right now (two short, easily readable reports) :
1. "Central Banks: Damned if They Do; Damned if They Don't", by John Hoefle
In response to a systemic financial crisis centered in the big banks, the major central banks have issued $3.5 trillion digital dollars in loans to the banking system, much of it in exchange for worthless collateral, thus taking some of the worthless paper off the banks' books. This bailout program is spreading hyperinflation, worse than Germany 1923, worldwide. http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2008/3525banks_damned.html
2. "After Irish `No': Cancel All the Old EU Treaties! by Helga Zepp-LaRouche
The Irish voters' [Ireland was the only European country which put it to a referendum] rejection of the new European Union Treaty (Lisbon Treaty), which was to transform Europe into an oligarchical and imperial dictatorship, now cannot go into effect as planned on Jan. 1, 2009.