Saturday, September 13, 2008

The end of the whole mess

Nibbles McGee here...

We've had a lot of rumblings in the comments section throughout the last few months about just what The Scandal to Rule Them All will be and when it will finally topple the Lightbringer. For futurity, I'd like to ask our current crop of readers to formally list their predictions.

What do you think will be the source of the scandal which finally drags Obama under? What month do you think it will hit at last? I mean hit in the mainstream media, not just the blogosphere. (If you think it's already hit, feel free to post that, too, I guess.)

My contribution: Tony Rezko (and the indictment). December. Won't peak until February, though.

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

I've been saying for months that Obama would implode. We are seeing it happening. I agree that the Rezco mess will end in an indictment. December sounds right. Just after McCain wins the election and right before the Inaugauration.

I have voted a straight Democratic ticket since 1972 and would never have thought I could vote for a Republican for anything, but I will NEVER vote for Obama and will gladly cast my vote for McCain.

Hillary '12

katiebird said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Christopher Corbell said...

I'm hoping the rumors about some damning video rants from Trinity Church featuring the Obama family visibly (and possibly even participating) are true. Also I'm hoping more Democrats will wake up to how corrupt the Dean/Axelrod/Obama axis really is.

At the same time, it may be a weak approach to rely on some scandal appearing if you really don't want Obama to win.

If you want to see Obama lose on message and not on scandal, I think the way is to bring the middle - including Reagan Democrats and Clinton Democrats - over to McCain/Palin, focusing on the economy.

Obama's platform (and not his doublespeak about it) completely reverses the third way that Bill Clinton pioneered. It's a Johnson/Carter/Mondale platform of huge bureaucratic government.

There's nothing in the Obama platform like this bold statement from 1992: "Therefore we call for a revolution in government -- to take power away from entrenched bureaucracies and narrow interests in Washington and put it back in the hands of ordinary people. We vow to make government more decentralized, more flexible, and more accountable..." Clinton/Gore shrunk the size of the federal government back to pre-Kennedy levels, while still overseeing the biggest peacetime economic boom in history.

Let moderates know that Obama is going to roll back Clinton's work and bring the whole country toward bloated social democracy, and with a Democratic congress there will be no check on the damage he can do. There is a silent third party in this nation, and it's the political center which -should- go for McCain/Palin if it understands what Obama is up to.

Anonymous said...

Definitely Rezko but earlier I think. October seems about right. Sentencing in the Chicago trial is a week before the election. Perhaps a little plea bargaining before his Nevada trial.

Joseph Cannon said...

The "Obama's a Muslim" smear and all cognate smears are just as reprehensible as the damned lies told about Sarah Palin and her daughter.

OTE admin said...

Rezko will eventually bring Obama down and finish off his political career, but it will be after the election. Obama isn't going to win the presidency anyway.

I think what we may see here in the coming weeks leading up to the election is the possibility the Republicans will hold their fire, not nailing Obama's ass over a plethora of scandals and so forth, realizing as they do every time the Obama campaign and their nutroots flame throwers throw out another attack on the McCain/Palin ticket, it benefits them. I suspect McCain, having been a victim of political filth, may be adverse to attack politics.

Who would have ever thought the Republicans could ever be capable of relatively clean politics?

Mike J. said...

It will likely be something he or Biden says in the course of some debate or a townhall meeting. Obama really seems to be unraveling under all the stress, there's no telling what he'll blurt out.

Mike J.

Joseph Cannon said...

I HOPE that people will start to pay more attention to the Chicago mess.

Anonymous said...

Oh, here's hoping Obama gets called on his increasingly inarticulate blatherings, Mike J. I would prefer that his crimes of the past be exposed as well, but getting felled for the moron he is right now would also be extremely satisfying.

Anonymous said...

Rezko but earlier than december. Don't discount Michelle's ability to implode the BHO campaign.

I want Obama to lose but I do not think it is a sure thing he will. He could win.
THe media simply will not go after him. They refuse. If McCain won't go for the jugular McCain could lose. Obama is not imploding he is fading.
He should be imploding but the media won't cover his mistakes.
This scandal will have to break despite the media's desperation to avoid attacking or even questioning Obama. It will have to come from Fitzgerald's office or the Right blogosphere. The scandal has to break in early October at the latest.

Prem said...

Maybe Philip Berg's lawsuit will get some traction. BHO, the DNC and the FEC have to reply to the lawsuit before the end of September---the 30th, I believe. He just might not be eligible to be POTUS.

Wish more would come out about his connection with Ayers and the voter fraud that ACORN is involved with.

Anonymous said...

It's a chicken and egg kind of thing. Rezko will keep shut if it looks like Obama will win in hopes of a pardon. If Obama continues to tank he will start to get nervous and start singing.

nicfit said...

My vote is with ineligible due to citizenship (thank you, HRC), with a side order of Rezko.

Anonymous said...

My prediction, for what little it's worth.
I'd give him 60:40 odds at winning the Presidency.
I don't think he'll be brought down anytime soon (I hope I'm wrong), though he could narrowly lose the election.
If he is brought down anytime in the immediate future (next year or so), it will be by the Chicago corruption connections (Rezko, etc.).
If he wins the Presidency, I think it's likely he'll be relatively popular, at least initially (remember the era of Bush's 90% popularity ratings). He's charismatic and good at pleasing/flattering people.

I think it might take quite a while for the implications of an Obama presidency to become fully apparent (e.g. much as with Putin).

I agree with the previous comment that the press isn't going after him. If you look at polling data for the demographic that constitutes high-end MSM employees - i.e. information technology sector, upper middle class, mostly post-graduate education, age (seems that majority of reporters are on the young side) - it's polling >70% for Obama. For the most part, they're not going to touch him, and will instead pour their resources into going after McCain/Palin. Especially at the very top end, you have journalists educated at institutions like Stanford - they consider themselves the gatekeepers, and they're going to be completely in the tank for Obama (and react with offense at the idea of Palin).

Incidentally, I began warning my friends about Obama over a year and a half ago. Most couldn't recognize that there was something seriously wrong with him, and few expected Obama to win the Democratic nomination.

Look up the story of Cassandra of Troy (Priam's daughter). I think it has relevance here.

Perry Logan said...

My guess is that there will be no single catastrophe, but that Obama will get limper and limper in the polls. That's the Obama pattern.

Barring some industrial-strength election fraud, Obama has no chance. Also spracht Perry.

katiebird said...

What about the old, "God Damn America" thing? He says he wasn't in the church that particular day. Does that matter?

katiebird said...

I should add that the "GD America" thing was one of the first things that made me think I wouldn't vote for Obama. I actually shudder every time I see it. And my thinking back in April was, "Why should I hold my nose to vote for this guy, he's going to lose big"

Am I the only one bothered by it? Is it yesterday's news?

Joseph Cannon said...

I would not be surprised to learn that there are as-yet-unseen horrors waiting to emerge from the Trinity video vaults. Maybe not the fabled "Whitey" tape -- I now suspect that we will never see that one emerge. But maybe something else.

By the way, Reverend Wright supposedly has a book coming out. I would expect to see the getting of even. Will THAT suffice, Nibbles?

Anonymous said...

The missing years. There are many gaps in his years from 18 to 25 years of age. The Republican's have surely researched him from his date of birth until now. He will not release his Columbia school records and there has to be a reason. Plus, even though he mentions it in his book, drugs, the use of or sale, and the early years in Chicago as well as his association with Rezko could very doom him in the general election.

Anonymous said...

Ooooh, the missing years is an interesting possibility. So is an expose on the missing parts of the years we allegedly know all about.

Sage said...

I don't know that it will take a major scandal to do Obama in. His flip flops and his and Biden's gaffes seem to be doing a pretty good job of tanking him.

Mountain Sage

Anonymous said...

I think first of all the lawsuit could be making him not eligible.

But since early in the primaries I thought there is a video in the hands of the republicans that shows him in his church, actively hearing and reacting to the Wright-hate-sermons.

maybe the "whitey" video will pop up too.

All this drug use, gay-sex and muslim stuff, I have the feeling he is going to talk himself out of this.

But the trinity church would clarify that he is since 20 years knowingly member of an extremist church.
Plus he is a LIAR.
(don't we know that already?)

Anonymous said...

If he manages to get elected I'm sure there will be an Illinois project ala the Arkansas
project. Scandal news (bogus or notl)24/7 complete with the usual moralizing. The Republicans will probably get the House back and move to impeach him for illegal wiretapping or invading Pakistan without congressional approval.

G said...

The following comment doesn't really belong in this thread - but it's as good a place as any.
Final wrap-up on the Techdude question:

I completed a long series of linguistic forensic tests. This included use of JGAAP (an authorship determination tool) with cross entropy, histogram distance, and KS distance used to compare authors. The feature sets I tested included words, longer word n-grams, and character bigrams, as well as purely syntactic features (parts of speech, obtained via the CLAWS part-of-speech tagger, and the results of sentence parsing, obtained via the Stanford Natural Language Parser). I also quantified sharing of words and longer word n-grams using the tool WCopyfind. And I looked at a lot of other linguistic features as well (use of contractions, punctuation, the specific syntactic features described by Carole Chaski, etc.).

I have multiple independent samples of Adam Fink's writing to compare with the Techdude samples.

The upshot:
1. Stormfront Techdude is very unlikely to be Adam Fink. Since Stormfront Techdude's online persona is at least partially fabricated, his professed identity couldn't readily be used to exclude Fink. And the language is superficially similar. But it turns out that many linguistic features differentiate Stormfront Techdude from Fink.

2. All the tests very strongly confirm that Adam Fink is the Obama COLB Techdude.

Anonymous said...

"Plus he is a LIAR"

Saddam has WMDs.... I did not have sexual relations* with that woman... READ MY LIPS-- NO NEW TAXES... I am not a crook ...Jack, don't buy a single vote more than necessary. I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for a landslide (...or "I do not have Addison's disease" take your pick) and who could forget Parson Weems's lie about the very first president and the busted Cherry tree (ok this one is a strech) ...at least Clinton was technically accurate about not fucking, but what about "I didn't inhale?"

It's not to vindicate any present day prevaricators (lest of all Nobama, Bosnia Hil' or the Grandma/Momma from Wasilla) with this lineage of equivocations, but just sayin' whilst etymologists claim "government" comes from the Greek "kybernesis" --to steer or guide, it's more telling to look at the French addition (the --ment suffix). Ment is to lie. Kybern or Gouvern (steer) + Ment: Probably why so many politicians work in Parliaments (parler + ment) ...as opposed to Congress-- who's Latin root congredi means to "come together" kinda like the Beatles tune, or a circle jerk (speaking of which, comic books aside, Cannonfire has gotten a little lame lately...)