You can tell the general election has begun when conservative attack letters start appearing in the local paper. You know the ones I speak of. They regurgitate Rush's or Sean's or Joe's talking points without backing them up with any evidence. Except spite. Please follow me below the fold for a shining example.
One such letter appeared in The (Fond du lac) Reporter today. It starts off with:
A recent letter asked "Why does everybody have such a problem with a member of a minority achieving a position of either prominence or power in our society?" as if racism is really why voters oppose Barack Obama.
Fair enough. There has been a lot of talk about racism and there will be even even more talk about it during the general. Either in the blogosphere, on TV, or in public gathering places all over the nation. But then the writer gets to the meat of his mantra:
That's completely false and this voter opposes Obama because of his utter lack of competence, courage and character.
HUH? At first look, this is quite a bold statement and it made me mad enough to want to go online and dash off a pointed response. But I wasn't able to get online right away and I'm glad I didn't. Now I've had time to cool off, I decided the best tack was to post a diary about this letter and let all of my fellow Kossacks in on the fun. Because I feel this letter is utter nonsense, but I need some input before I send a refutation in to the editor.
Let's refute this together, shall we? First, the aspersions cast on Obama's character.
Competence:Iran and North Korea's nuclear pursuits and the desire of Islamic jihadists for nuclear weapons make today's world very dangerous, yet Obama pledges to cut investments in missle defense. He also voted against the recent bill preserving our intelligence gathering capabilities, which received broad bipartisan support, passing 68-29 in the Senate.
I'm not sure how this exactly translates to a lack of competence on Senator Obama's part. As per the second example, is he talking about the FISA bill (aka Protecting The Telecoms's Butts Bill?).
Secondly, the intimation Senator Obmas is a coward.
Courage: On June 4, Obamas said Jerusalem should remain Israel's undivided capital. But after a single day of Palestinian complaints, he backpadaled, now saying the Jews and Palestinians will have to negotiate it for themselves. Such cowardice leaves little doubt that Obama would fold like a house of cards in his no-precondition, direct talks with Iran's Ahmadinejad.
I give the author full marks for correctly spelling the name of Iran's leader, but Senator Obama is correct in saying the Israelis and Palestinians have to work out their problems themselves. They will be the one who have to live with whatever agreement is worked out. But how this proves Obama would immediately knuckle under to the leaders of other countries makes no sense.
Finally, the biggie. The author says Senator Obama lacks character.
Character: No responsible father who values honesty could possibly expose his children to the foul lies of Jeremiah Wright. And nobody with a shred of decency or compassion could reach Obama's extremes on abortion. In Illinois, he fought against legal protection for fully born babies who survived their abortions. Even after being seperated from their mothers and gaining full physical independence, Obbama thinks these children should be starved to death.
Delivery ward nurse Jill Stanek testified twice before Obama for born-alive infant protection, offering her firsthand experience and and pictures of premature births. She says her efforts "didn't faze him at all".
The author is talking about two seperate things here. Firstly, what lies did Jeremiah Wright say? Secondly, if he's judging Senator Obama's character by what his pastor says, why not a word about John McCain and his formerly close relationship with John Hagee and Rod Parsley who've made some truly charming comments?
Conservatives are going to bring up Obama's vote on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act again and again this election, so I best address it now. Firstly,this example is not proof Senator Obama is "extreme" on abortion; and second of all, Stanek is a well known pro-lifer. So I'm not sure if I can trust what she says about Senator Obama.
The final paragraph goes like this:
Conservatives are judging Obama not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character. Unfortunately for him, that's a contest in which he doesn't stand a chance.
Oh,really? The author appears to be judging Obama simply on the fact he is a Democrat and doesn't stand for what the author wants. His name is Calvin Freiburger and he fancies himself a rising star in the conservative world. I first heard about him when he began writing letters in favor of Wisconsin's "Defense" of Marriage Amendment. His letters to the editor usually contain rants about anything he sees as "liberal", and I am certain to see more letters about Senator Obama in the coming months. The original letter can be found here:
Letters to the Editor
I invite you to post a comment on The Reporter's webpage, or even write and post a reply letter. Now I'll climb down from my soapbox because I see a long line is forming for it. Thank you for your patience, fellow Kossacks and good night.