I get the sense that you take umbrage with the authors of this analysis, Noam.

Now we parse the writing of the fathers?

Well, okay, perhaps Bill Kristol could start with the nativist and somewhat terrifying writings of Bill Buckley's father. And there are the curious far-right views of Rush Limbaugh's father. And don't forget Hollywood, there's always an interesting opinion or two from Mel Gibson's anti-semitic father worth circulating. How about spouses who steal prescription drugs, like Cindy McCain? Oh, forgot, McCain is untouchable, and Cindy's family ties to organized crime are unmentionable.

Maybe so, but BHO's not very good at raising the people's consciousness. He'd do better to offer the nation _more_ clarity  and bright lines on domestic issues and less of a hardline stance, more attempts to unify left and right, on Iraq.

I await the forthcoming Clinton campaign ad.

If this isn't news, why is the great and mighty arbitrer of all that is worth reporting - Noam Scheiber - reporting it? Trying to put out fires before they consolidate into fire storms?

This in itself says nothing.  This coupled with the countless elitist gaffes, politically incorrect Reverends, muslim-sounding name, lack of experience, idiocy about talking with tyrants , withdrawal at all costs, speaks a hell of a lot about the "golden child. "

His "muslim-sounding name" speaks a lot about the golden child?  Honestly, jwl, do you intentionally parody a moron?  

And for god's sake, talking with tyrants is something every president has done.  It is the way things work in the world.  It isn't giving in to them, at all.  Bashar al-Asad is not bin Laden; he is not a millenial lunatic.  He has a set of interests and concerns which can be manipulated.  As to the mullahs in Iran.  Even crazy old Kim Jong Il.  It is moronic to think otherwise.

My 89 year old bitter Pennsylvania grandmother said to me yesterday "Hussein is one of the most popular names in the world, you know.  Kind of like John here."  She's never been farther than 200 miles from home in her life and now she's the global name expert.  

I don't think the media elite even realize how ridiculous Hillary's recent behavior is to these people.  

Also, you could check out the earlier writing of Bill Kristol's  socialist father,

What boneill said, even though I am not an Obama supporter.

I agree with Noam, it is ridiculous to hold viewpoints of a father (regarding a situation in Kenya, something entirely divorced from contemporary U.S. concerns, no less!) against Obama. He is vulnerable on many fronts but calling him a closeted Marxist is about as ridiculous as terming Hillary a sociopath.

But then again, this is coming from the right wing nut-o-sphere (what an apt expression, Noam! I just love it). I will grant that people like Mickey Kaus may reason effectively against the Democrats every now and again, but did anybody really expect anything bright from Billy Kristol and his ilk?

jwl, like Bush doesn't talk to tyrants?  He does worse:  he looks into their eyes and announces to the world that they are good "folks," with good souls.

Wandreycerl, I'm from Pennsylvania also -- and I think you are right. The way Hillary is playing this makes her seem opportunistic and condescending. She should not underestimate the ability to the public to see through all of this.

So, it's the out of touch, elitest, patronising Marxist vs the straight talking, patriotic, tax cutting war hero.

(and the Marxist's black!)

As I've said before, Obama has too many liabilities to be a successful candidate in a general election:

* He's a black supremacist, but he's also a white supremacist (as revealed by the recent episode in which campaign staffers singled out white supporters to stand behind him on a stage).

* He's a Marxist, a radical Islamist, and a wine-sipping, patrician, Harvard elitist.

* He's condescending to working-class voters, and he's too black.

He reminds me, in a sense, of "the aleph" from the classic Borges story: he is a single vessel containing every un-American concept and quality, even those that are directly contradictory to one another.

There are only two solutions: either Hillary Clinton must be installed as the Democratic nominee for the good of the very voters who rejected her, or another white candidate -- perhaps Al Gore -- must be enlisted to run.

I congratulate you JWL for not calling Obama a 'terrorist.' You're arguing that Obama is elitist, tone-deaf, and articulates a disagreeable foreign policy. These are all fair criticisms (whether I agree or not) and from what I've seen, a huge leap forward for you. I welcome you to the world of rational political debate. Kudos!

Obama really does come across as a bitter, elitist Marxist intellectual.  I mean, there's the grim hostility in his demeanor, the narrow-minded class-warfare style of his policies, and the inevitable leather jacket and goatee beard that used to be de rigeur for any serious Trotzkyist.  And that wasn't only the women!  Men often wore them too, you know.

All that's needed now is the discovery that he took a class in Folksongs of the 1930s when he was at Columbia.

On Obama Sr. and Max Mosely's Nazi sex orgy:

One should never judge children by their father's acts.

But failure to learn from your father's crimes is a particular offense.

Thus, Max Mosely's recent Nazi play orgy, in which he beat a woman dressed in concentration camp garb while shouting in German, is particularly offensive because he is the son renowned Nazi sympathizers, himself.

Obama's political relationship with the Weathermen, while perhaps incidental and opportunistic, and not really evidence of Communist leanings, become more concerning when we hear that Barack's father argues in his paper for taking all cars from Asian and European citizens of Kenya for the crime of being white. (It really is a terrible essay. Read the last page. We should take care not be apologists for it).

For context, I was recently shamed into agreeing to vote for Obama against McCain if (when?) Hillary loses, but trivializing the opposition he is going to face is not going to help our case.

I know I should leave the ranter alone, but I have to point out some obvious points about Hungarian's post.

Wine-sipping radical Islamist?  I'm probably sure they don't drink.

Marxist patrician?  Pretty sure that Marxists aren't bourgeoisie (or don't think they are).

Although it certainly is impossible to be elected to the presidency with an Ivy-league degree.

*crickets*

For the record, jwl2672, the Reverend Wright's rants were not "politically incorrect" as you characterize them.  They were the opposite.

"Politically incorrect" is a Leftist construct.  Not in the least a Rightist one.  Everything the Rev said would fit comfortably into Leftist doctrine, although even from the Left it would be more respectably articulated.

In any event, kindly do not attribute "politically incorrect" to the Right.  That phrase has always and clearly been a mocking and a satire of Leftists mindsets.  In the Orwellian tradition of such satire.

Oh, soon we will hear Democrats explaining that "in context" Obama's father's essay was really awfully moderate.

Only a right wing hack could possibly infer from the paper that  Obama's father was in the slightest a Lefty ideologue.

But, is it permissible, or outrageous McCarthyism, to add this bit to Obama's dossier?  At the very least, it certainly does nothing to counterbalance or contradict the many other exotic and eyebrow raising details of Obama's background.

bigfish, I think the Hungarian was kidding. He does that sometimes.

'"Politically incorrect" is a Leftist construct. '

Really?  Tell that to the right wingers who think you're aiding terrorism if you don't wear a certain pin on your lapel.  

No, "political correctness" is in the eye of the beholder.  Always has been.

Forget what Barak's father wrote years back.  Does everyone really believe that there is some sort of infallible and completely unavoidable genetic link from fathers to offspring that will make children believe exactly the same things?  This sounds like a Fox News story.  Or maybe, the National Enquirer.  This entire discussion is somewhat delusional.

Then there's this group of radical fundamentalist idiots that think a person's name denotes what they are.  Obviously everyone named 'Johnathan' or 'Jim' must be a comedian (Winters/Cary). Taking it a bit further, everyone with the named 'David' or 'Dennis' (Berkowitz/Rader) must be a serial killer. (Don't let the radical fundamentalist law and order folks read this or they'll want to put them all in prison or worse right away!)

Really psantillana?

...oh.  Whoops.

*sheepishly walks toward the dark corner of the room.  Looks down*

"Hey, I didn't know I had a tail!  And look, It's between my legs!"

I wish people would make up their mind. SOme say he is a muslim. he says he is a Christian. Some say he is Elitist. Some say the way he admonishes parents he sounds like a social conservatist, The way he adheres to the constitution he sounds conservative. I have never seen one man labeled so many contradictory things.  Imo Obama is someone who has common sense. He takes things ISSUE by ISSUE. He doesnt say well I'm a democrat so I have to adere to all these precepts. He takes each issue and looks at it from a common sensical point of view so he appears to be all these different things its cause he is get this Brilliant and creative (something he doesnt get credit for) he is able to synthesize differing ideas. Its this dogmatic approach to politics that says everything Marxist is Bad Everything Adam Smith/ Capitalist  is good. NO thats a gross oversimplification they both make interesting points that you can incorporate it does NOT mean that you are one or the other. I find it laughable that people think that this is a man who is an empty suit who is all flash and no substance. This is one of the most intelligent and creative politicians I have ever seen. While he seems inconsistent there is a consistency to him.

That is why Obama is a president of the future. He is not dogmatic and ideologically infested like most if not all these politicians.

Carol

"Hillary Clinton must be installed as the Democratic nominee for the good of the very voters who rejected her,"  wonderful bela. and good show bigfish. The scary thing is that sometimes it is impossible to distinguish between a genuine Clinton supporter and someone just out to take a piss (like bela)

honestly, is this nonsense "But failure to learn from your father's crimes is a particular offense." parody or serious, especially considering that now writing a paper is somehow tantamount to committing a crime. The only sin worth commenting on about Barack's father is that he left him, a sin no one is accusing Barack of. Certainly, the whole sins of the father bit is detestable. We are responsible for our own sins only, and are judged as such.

If Obama's not a closeted Marxist then why should I vote for him?

This "story" has truly warmed my cockles, since it shows how desperate things have become for the VRWC II crew.  Thanks for keeping it alive, Noam.

From a reader of the New Republic dismayed by the possiblity that Obama and Obama's father are not communists:If Obama's not a closeted Marxist then why should I vote for him?...

citizenghost, you don't know your history, your political history, or your literary history.  Otherwise you would get that "politically incorrect" was originally said with a straight faced by Leftists.  And later adapted as a satirical jab at Leftists by their opponents.

You do not have sufficient sensitivity to the nuance of language.  Read more.