You gotta be kidding me.
Mary Bunger, a 44-year-old single mom from Abington, emerged from the town’s general store on Wednesday, the only place to purchase a snack in a 10-mile radius.
“I am definitely going to try to go with Hillary,” she said. “I almost feel like (Obama’s) the anti-Christ from the Middle East.”
Bunger reads news online about the election and has been “trying to talk everybody into voting, especially this year because I’m really scared for Obama to get it.”
(via)
Aw, shame on you, OW. Let’s break down the syllogism.
One voter is badly misinformed.
That voter supports Clinton.
Therefore, “The Current Clinton Voter” is badly misinformed.
Nevermind the inexcusable leap of logic and unsupported conclusion. You really want to go that route? I’m sure we could find examples that would allow us to substitute any candidate’s name for Clinton’s.
Yeah, but still, quaker,
is beyond the pale.
Sure it is. What’s that have to do with what I wrote?
For the record, Quaker, I’m with you. You’re 100% right.
But on the topic of this particular voter… Wow. What a ridiculous human being. Reading stuff like that just makes me want to vomit in my mouth.
Yeah, it’s pretty crazy. I agree that most Clinton voters DON’T think this way, but this woman… WOW.
Can you say xen-o-PHO-bic?
Sure it is. What’s that have to do with what I wrote?
Um, nothing. You’re right.
I actually know a woman who said exactly the same thing (not verbatim, of course). Is there a place these people take courses in stupid?
Look, we are not a well-educated country. But unlike other uneducated countries, we have a very robust democracy. In spite of the fact that this woman is desperately misinformed, she is not hopeless. I cannot brook a Clintonian reaction and simply say “screw ‘em.”
Well done, z.
Gosh, I wonder if Ms. Bunger twice voted for Bush.
I’ve mentioned this before, and granted, it’s anecdotal. But I have several conservative friends. They would never vote for Clinton, but a year ago they were seriously considering Obama because he was sincere. Now, they’re echoing all the talking points.
Some reporters in the big press orgs like to roll their eyes at the pathetic rubes out in the hinterlands. Those are exactly the people OW and others have responsibly been saying the Democratic party must speak to, but without pandering or capitulating.
In this case, the reporter doesn’t tell us what else the voter in question might believe, or why he chose her to present in this article. Is she an otherwise functional human who has been exposed to some especially vicious rumors? Is she an end-times apocolyptic evangelical? Does she believe the mothership is coming for her?
The reporter won’t say. Instead, he just presents this hapless woman as representative of small-town Indiana. She is representative of nothing other than the reporter’s willingness to look down his nose at the hayseeds.
Perhaps Mary Bunger and Nash McCabe went to school together.
So apparently there’s hope she won’t be able to figure out how to pull a lever and we’ll have one more stupid person not voting.
I agree with Quaker and others, Oliver, you’ve overstated your bias again.
That said, can somebody point me in the direction of the campaign tactics from the Obama group that would create a similar creature using the same language about Mrs. Clinton? Because I know I’ve seen plenty of subtle moves throughout the primary from her campaign that would lead to this sort of idiocy.
I know I’ve seen plenty of subtle moves throughout the primary from her campaign that would lead to this sort of idiocy.
OK, there was Bob Kerrey and his idiot rant. But other than that, who in the Clinton campaign has said anything that would lead someone to believe Obama is the antichrist? I think this sort of delusion is fueled not by the Clinton campaign, but by an assortment of conspiracy theorists, religious zealots, xenophobes, racists, and other crackpots. And I’m willing to bet there are some Clinton supporters included.
Now if a candidate’s supporters are fair game, I don’t think you’ll have any problem finding Obama supporters who hold outlandish opinions of Clinton.
Let’s see: There was the Obama in African garb nonsense. There was HRC’s own “as far as I know” moment. There have been the pinprick attempts to connect him to Farrakhan, Hamas, and Ayer (a man he barely met…when he was eight…)
There is “Barack Hussein Obama/Osama,” which I do not blame on Clinton, but which I think she could have been noble enough to denounce outright. And I would have wanted to see the same from the Obama camp if anybody had dared engage in such childishness with Hillary Clinton’s name.
I know there are Obama supporters who hold outlandish opinions of Clinton. I have not seen those opinions enter the mainstream with the same ridiculous dissemination as the similar ideas about Obama.
There was the Obama in African garb nonsense. There was HRC’s own “as far as I know” moment. There have been the pinprick attempts to connect him to Farrakhan, Hamas, and Ayer (a man he barely met…when he was eight…)
1) The African garb photo? Drudge claimed that it was “being circulated” by the Clinton campaign, but he carefully did NOT say he had received it from the Clinton campaign. No one has said that Clinton campaign staffers sent that photo to anyone in media.
2) The “as far as I know” moment? Review the transcript. Clinton was asked three times consecutively if she “believes” Obama is a Muslim. The first two times, she answered definitively. When pressed yet again, she answered, “There’s no reason to think that…as far as I know.”
3) Pinprick attempts to connect him to Farrakhan, Hamas? Clinton piled on with Russert in calling for Obama to denounce AND reject Farrakhan and that was a stupid moment. But it was Russert who asked, not Clinton. Hamas? I’m drawing a blank.
4)Ayer? You’re balling up a couple of things. Obama and Ayer both sat on the board of a foundation and Ayer hosted a meeting at his home that Obama attended as a fresh-faced candidate for the state house. Obama was eight when Ayer was in the Weather Underground.
There are some Obama supporters who have accused Clinton of being a closet racist, but not for anything she has said or done. They accuse her based on their own interpretations of what some campaign operatives and officials have said. Some of the quotes they point to are genuinely offensive (see Ferraro, G). But in some other instances, the logic is so incredibly tortured that the Geneva Conventions should be put in play.
Hamas? I’m drawing a blank.
That was McCain.
Is she even going to vote for HRC in the GE?
QiaB: Clinton was asked three times consecutively if she “believes” Obama is a Muslim. The first two times, she answered definitively. When pressed yet again, she answered, “There’s no reason to think that…as far as I know.”
Ah, so as far as being a strong woman goes, all one has to do is ask her a question THREE times and she’ll cave.
so as far as being a strong woman goes, all one has to do is ask her a question THREE times and she’ll cave.
And then Beetlejuice shows up.
Ah, so as far as being a strong woman goes, all one has to do is ask her a question THREE times and she’ll cave.
Now you’re being silly. And lazy. You can’t bother to go find the transcript? Here ya go:
OK, this is what the Clinton campaign has done to make Ms. Bunger in Indiana believe Obama is “the anti-christ from the Middle East”?
Try it this way. Here’s a snip from today’s Maureen Dowd column:
If you need help counting all the things wrong with this paragraph, go see today’s Daily Howler. Somerby takes filets this mackerel cleanly in the second part of today’s post.
When you’re done, come back and explain why you think it’s OK for Obama Democrats to do the same thing to Mr. Obama’s Democratic opponent.
Actually, Quaker, I think it was Kroft who was being lazy.
Is she an otherwise functional human who has been exposed to some especially vicious rumors?
Yes. And who is most at fault for letting her continue to believe such nonsense? All clues point to the media. We tune into the news to be better informed. They don’t seem to do that job anymore.
QiaB: Clinton was asked three times consecutively if she “believes” Obama is a Muslim. The first two times, she answered definitively. When pressed yet again, she answered, “There’s no reason to think that…as far as I know.”
SDM: Ah, so as far as being a strong woman goes, all one has to do is ask her a question THREE times and she’ll cave.
QiaB: Now you’re being silly. And lazy. You can’t bother to go find the transcript?
Huh???
I was going off your description of the interview. Now you’re telling me I (meaning you) didn’t have it right?
The correct answer, after the 3rd time asked, of course, would be:
“Steve, do you have a motherfucking question?“
The correct answer, after the 3rd time asked, of course, would be:
“Steve, do you have a motherfucking question?“
That would have required her to be tough.
I repeat:
Did you review the transcript? I think you didn’t. Did you follow up your answer to my earlier question, “But other than that, who in the Clinton campaign has said anything that would lead someone to believe Obama is the antichrist?” I think you didn’t.
Instead, you’re trying to make it Clinton’s fault for doing what any other human life form would do under the same circumstances.
And Duros has the correct answer.
You had it right the first time. I was being silly. (Not to self: Be cautious when snarking around Quaker. Might take it too seriously.)
But, as for the “as far as I know” moment? Review the transcript (or, better still, the video as I did). She could have stopped at “No. No. Why would I? No, there is nothing to base that on.” without out the brief pause and the “as far as I know” added on.
I’m sure there are many human life forms that, after two firm responses and a third that was also clear and direct, would NOT have weakened the third with the unnecessary “as far as I know”.
She could have stopped at “No. No. Why would I? No, there is nothing to base that on.” without out the brief pause and the “as far as I know” added on.
I have to agree. There was no reason to add that on. What’s-her-name called Clinton a monster in an off-the-cuff, “off the record” moment. She could have added “as far as I know.” But she didn’t. She got fired the next day.
I’m trying to see your point, Quaker, but it eludes me.
Guys, you have missed the point. This woman is not atypical - she’s a normal person living an average life in a Southern or Appalachian area. The rumor that Obama is the anti-christ originates in the Baptist churches down here, then gets spread via a whispering campaign to the general populace. She’s not kidding. She’s actually concerned that these are the END TIMES because everyone around her says so.
She doesn’t get MSNBC on her cable system if she even has cable, and she never heard of Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. She voted for Bush because she wanted him to keep her safe from the evil Muslims and thinks he’s a good guy because he sent our soldiers to bring democracy to those poor people who weren’t lucky enough to be born a white Christian. She ACTUALLY BELIEVES that. She doesn’t know we torture prisoners and if you tried to get her to sign a copy of the Bill of Rights she’d report you to the sheriff for distributing communist propaganda. She thinks America is supposed to be a Christian country because all the founders were Christian. Yes, that’s not true, but that’s what she was taught in either public or private faith-based government funded church school down here.
I live in the South and I am surrounded by these people. I hear my aunt and uncle repeat these talking points that get circulated through their church. If you met them, you’d think they were perfectly nice people and they are. There’s nothing obviously backwards about them - for this area, they’re sort of upper class because my aunt is in county government. They’re “good people,” they don’t believe in evolution and they think I’m damaged because I’m well-educated.
This is what Barack has to deal with if he’s going to get votes down here. A good number of these people won’t vote for him because he’s black (or as they’d say, “colored”), even if they are Democrats. We don’t actually have Democcrats here, they’re Dixiecrats- that’s the word they’d use to describe themselves in many cases - and they think Hillary is the only thing standing between them and the Apocalypse. The challenge is going to be for him to seem non-threatening to the ones that can be reached and it won’t be easy. The local news parrots all the misinterpretations of his speeches here as if they’re fact.
I wixh I could work for him down here as an interpreter, because that’s what it’s going to take for him to learn their language.