• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Sweet Sue on A reminder about ebola tr…
    katiebird on A reminder about ebola tr…
    riverdaughter on A reminder about ebola tr…
    katiebird on A reminder about ebola tr…
    riverdaughter on A reminder about ebola tr…
    Mr Mike on A reminder about ebola tr…
    katiebird on EBOLA, EBOLA, WE’RE ALL…
    paper doll on The Employment Index: Wish me…
    paper doll on Harumph and bother: a post abo…
    paper doll on Harumph and bother: a post abo…
    Partition Functions on EBOLA, EBOLA, WE’RE ALL…
    r u reddy on EBOLA, EBOLA, WE’RE ALL…
    jmbanner@umich.edu on Harumph and bother: a post abo…
    Monster from the Id on Harumph and bother: a post abo…
    riverdaughter on Harumph and bother: a post abo…
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama big pharma Bill Clinton Chris Christie cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos debate Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean Joe Biden John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Keith Olbermann Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare occupy wall street OccupyWallStreet Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

    • The quality of mercy is not strained
      Remember, prosecutors have some degree of discretion about what they chose to prosecute. This is a perfect example: A Minnesota prosecutor will proceed with a child endangerment case against a mother who provided medical marijuana to her son to treat symptoms of a traumatic brain injury — despite the fact that Minnesota recently passed a […]
  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Looks like Scottish Independence is a “No”
      The calls are coming in. Assuming they are correct, I think this vote is a mistake, and I note that having been given a clean vote to leave and a chance to live their own values, but having given in to fear; for me, at least, Scottish complaints about privatization of the NHS and other [...]
  • Top Posts

Once More to the Fainting Couch

Kid Oakland has had another terrible shock that has sent him reeling once again to the fainting couch.  Poor dear. Just a little over a week ago, Kid was making noises about working on some kind of rapproachment with Clinton supporters in the hopes that we would come around and accept Barack Obama as the Democratic nominee. But that’s all water under the bridge now that Hillary Clinton has dared to mention Obama’s latest faux pas.

As we all know by now, Barack was trying to explain to a group of wealthy San Francisco voters why he can’t seem to make any headway with small-town Pennsylvania voters, and he came out with this beauty:

It’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Oops!

It’s not Barack’s fault, though. How could he know that someone was taping his presentation, even though the press had been locked out of the private meeting? It’s just so unfair! And Hillary should have ignored Barack’s little lapse into condescension toward small-town, working-class Pennsylvanians, because if only she hadn’t pushed it, the corporate media would have probably let it drop, right? Kid Oakland is so upset. He’s just beside himself. He writes:

In their hunger for power and their political cynicism, the Clintons have taken one passage from a speech by Barack Obama and staked the entire future of this campaign upon using that misconstrued passage to tear Senator Obama and the political movement behind him down. The Clintons have no compunction about ripping the Democratic party apart and destroying the career of Barack Obama if it means they might yet win.

Oh, those nasty, dastardly Clintons! According to Kid Oakland, Barack’s own words have had nothing to do with people getting this mistaken impression. It’s all Hillary’s fault. And, get this:

This is not new. It’s been brewing since Clinton lost Iowa; this is part of a deliberate attempt to smear Barack Obama and his supporters as elitist and out of touch.

Yes, folks, that evil witch Hillary and her husband have been plotting to paint poor Barack as an elitist ever since Hillary lost Iowa. How does Kid Oakland know this? He doesn’t say. Instead he offers the words of Machinists Union President Thomas Buffenberger in a speech at a Clinton rally before the Ohio primary.

“Hope. Change. Yes we can.” GIVE ME A BREAK! I’ve got news for all the latte-drinking, Prius-driving, Birkenstock-wearing trust-fund babies crowding in to hear him speak. This guy won’t last a round against the Republican attack machine. He’s a poet not a fighter.

I’m sure Kid didn’t mean to, but he left some important context out of his reporting of Buffenberger’s remarks. Buffenberger was outraged because Obama was repeatedly referring to the loss of 1600 jobs at the Maytag plant in Galesburg, IL in his stump speech. Obama had met with those workers and promised to intervene for them with one of his powerful supporters. Instead, Obama did nothing and then had the nerve to shed “crocodile tears” about those lost jobs in his stump speech. Here’s a part of Buffenberger’s speech that Kid Oakland conveniently ignored.

“He didn’t lift a finger to help those people when they needed help the most,” said IAM President Tom Buffenbarger, whose union represented the workers at Maytag. “Even now, he doesn’t have a clue and thinks those jobs went overseas and not to Mexico.”

“This is the same candidate who recently labeled unions as ‘special interest’ groups with too much influence in Washington, D.C.,” said Buffenbarger. “For the last eight years, we’ve defended our members’ jobs, pensions and health care benefits against a political agenda that’s been openly hostile to unions and working families. But a Johnny come lately candidate won’t solve the problem facing blue collar families.”

You can watch the entire Buffenberger speech here.

Yes, Barack met with the workers in Galesburg in 2004 and he even mentioned them in his speech to the 2004 Democratic Convention. According to the Chicago Tribune,

Obama had a special connection to Maytag: Lester Crown, one of the company’s directors and biggest investors whose family, records show, has raised tens of thousands of dollars for Obama’s campaigns since 2003. But Crown says Obama never raised the fate of the Galesburg plant with him, and the billionaire industrialist insists any jawboning would have been futile.

Perhaps Obama’s pleas would have been “futile,” but it still might have been nice if he had made the case for the Galesburg Maytag workers anyway. I can only assume that Obama didn’t want to risk offending a wealthy and influential supporter like Crown by arguing in favor of the workers who had begged Obama to talk to Crown. I wonder why the Machinists Union decided to endorse Hillary Clinton instead of Barack Obama?

In his latest screed at the big orange cheetos place, Kid Oakland argues at length that it is Hillary Clinton, not poor put upon Barack Obama, who is the elitist. You can go over there and read KO’s convoluted claims if you’re interested. I’m sorry, I just don’t buy it. If Obama didn’t mean it, he shouldn’t have said it in the first place. And as Lambert says, there are worse charges than elitism

…if there’s a charge that is career destroying in American politics, it’s the charge of racism, which the Obama campaign has cheerfully and freely deployed against not only the Clintons, but Hillary’s supporters as well. (The most vile forms of misogny have also been cheerfully and freely deployed against Clinton by the Obama campaign, and if I have anything to do with it, that will be career destroying. As indeed it ought to be.)

Grow up, kid. Look in the mirror.

Toward the end of his diary, KO says of Hillary Clinton

When you foment mistrust and resentment that hides your own policy views or the policy views of the candidate you are supporting, you are no friend of the working person. Quite the opposite. When you misrepresent political allies who share broad common ground with your listeners for the sake of political gain, the only thing you favor is the status quo.

But who is misrepresenting whose words? KO continues his lecture:

At the end of the day, Americans must ask ourselves, what is it that Barack Obama and his coalition of voters are trying to do in 2008? What are Obama’s intentions? What does he stand for? How might his statement have been deliberately misconstrued by a corporate media, a Republican Party and a Clinton campaign eager to tear him down?

These are good questions, but Kid Oakland doesn’t answer them in his diary. What does Obama stand for? What are his intentions? I don’t know the answers. I just know that he wants to be a “transformational” President who brings “hope” and “change,” but I don’t know what kind of change or whose hopes will materialize if Obama is elected.  Maybe Barack should start tell us instead of blaming voters for not figuring it out for themselves?

About these ads

46 Responses

  1. What’s up with these boiz? I’ve seen bananas that don’t bruise as easily.

    This is fair game. Obama said it, Hillary called him on it.

    Contrary to their claims, Obama wasn’t quoted out of context nor was anything twisted, distored or “interpreted.”

    Short version or long, what Obama said was an insult. The issue isn’t whether th people in small town America are “bitter,” the issue was Obama calling them bigoted, gun-toting religious extremists.

    Blaming it on their economic situation doesn’t remove the insult.

  2. I wonder what Kid Oakland would think if he read the full write up of Obama’s visit to billionaire’s row? I’m still reading the piece. I have to admit, I’m stunned. How did Obama get his “in” with these people? And what has he promised them?

  3. Oh this is too good. Check out these pics at Correntewire. Hillary is keeping it real in Indiana

    She’s tossing back Crown and beer with the real boys.

  4. And she looks like she’s having a great time, too — doesn’t she?

  5. BostonB, that recurring idea — we must come to Barack — is a weird campaign theme. I thought it was a politician’s job to convince ME.

    And I don’t see how it can be my fault if I’m not convinced.

  6. BB,

    I’d love a link to his full remarks. Do you have it handy?

  7. Lori,

    The full remarks are at Huffpost, but you can also get them at the link that Katie provided on her post. Here it is.

    http://www.zombietime.com/obama_visits_billionaires_row/

    Look down toward the bottom of the report at zombietime, and there is an audiolink.

  8. Don’t worry. Everything’s going to be fine.

    Whoever Kidnapped Josh Marshall’s got quotes from a Harvard sociologist that prove Obama’s not elitist.

    Heh. I almost spilled my latte when I read that!

  9. Oh, and the best part of Oakland’s “casual poetry” is this one, right there in plain sight in the quote:

    The Clintons have no compunction about ripping the Democratic party apart and destroying the career of Barack Obama

    Come on. Treating destroying the Democratic Party and destroying Barry’s career as equally serious? That’s just bizarre. I’d say that Oakland’s just a leetle over-invested in The Precious….

  10. Must-read piece of the day:

    What Clinton wishes she could say

    This is an excellent article because it covers so well what we know is coming with BO leading the ticket, and it debunks this silly notion about the vile campaign of Caligula Clinton:

    A lot of coverage of the Clinton campaign supposes them to be in kitchen-sink mode — hurling every pot and pan, no matter the damage this might do to Obama as the likely Democratic nominee in the fall.

    In fact, the Democratic race has not been especially rough by historical standards. What’s more, our conversations with Democrats who speak to the Clintons make plain that their public comments are only the palest version of what they really believe: that if Obama is the nominee, a likely Democratic victory would turn to a near-certain defeat.

    Far from a no-holds-barred affair, the Democratic contest has been an exercise in self-censorship.

    Rip off the duct tape and here is what they would say: Obama has serious problems with Jewish voters (goodbye Florida), working-class whites (goodbye Ohio) and Hispanics (goodbye, New Mexico).

    Republicans will also ruthlessly exploit openings that Clinton — in the genteel confines of an intraparty contest — never could. Top targets: Obama’s radioactive personal associations, his liberal ideology, his exotic life story, his coolly academic and elitist style.

  11. Lambert–

    Ha ha. That’s really funny. I guess the Clintons are better at keeping cameras and tape recorders out of their meetings with the superrich. I didn’t realize that Hillary has been handing out “I’m not bitter” stickers at her rallies. Good for her!

  12. katiebird,
    Reminds me of all the lectures I used to get at work about “not being a team player” and “it’s your fault you have bad morale.” My usual retort was rather long and convulsed but went something like “I was a bright, energetic, hopeful person when I started working here. What happened?”

    A friend of my put it differently and better: “I am not in charge of my own morale.”

    So BO, make me feel better about you.

  13. Before I say anything else: People need to stop linking to TPM and KOS! they make money on your “hits” so copy and paste, don’t offer the link!!!

    Substantive: I don’t get how Hillary is doing something bad/evil/insidious by using BO’s own words to attack him. Silly me, I thought this was a political campaign. And if you need four paragraphs of convoluted wordplay to explain the nuance of what he said, well it ain’t going to play to the heartland. It is just fodder for the machine that got people believing John Kerry was tantamount to a draft-dodger! They need to stop blaming other people for Obama’s own idiocy. And they need to start thinking electability, forget the unity and the sweetness and light. The rest of us live in the reality-based community.

    On a lighter note: there is video of Clinton doing her shot. I just can’t get the link. The best part is that she grabs her beer chaser before leaving the bar w/her shot!

  14. Katiebird–

    Back when I was still back at the orange place trying to find out what Obama meant by “hope” and “change,” I tried explaining to his supporters there that, no I didn’t want to be sent back to his website again. I just wanted one of them to tell me what the guy stands for. What principles does he believe in so strongly that he’ll go to the mat for them? I never got an answer. I finally started tell his supporters that Obama would have to ask for my vote and he’ll have to earn it. But that’s not how it works in Obamaland. You’re supposed to have some kind of conversion experience and then take it all on faith. Well I’m just not buying that crap from a politician.

  15. Guess that oh-so-sincere unity thing was just a passing fad for the kid. Those darn kids!

    Once he stops shaking from his temper tantrum, maybe the kid can knuckle down…err, “bundle up” ;) and get picked as a delegate for The Precious.

  16. BB: After the “Macaca” incident, any politician who doesn’t expect to be recorded everytime he/she opens his/her mouth is an idiot.

    Obama has never been in the spotlight like this before. He’s used to being able to say different things to different groups and get away with it.

    Bill and Hillary are used to it.

  17. myiq2xu,

    So true. Just more evidence that Obama does not have the experience necessary to run a presidential campaign–much less actually be President of the US.

  18. myiq2xu: Our girl does boilermakers!

  19. Cry me a river, KO. I almost went to dKos and posted a reply but realized what I was doing before I hit the button, and left. The time to take a stand was when all the BO camp was calling the Clintons racists, which is profoundly destructive..

    Those pix at Corrente – ROFL! Another boilermaker, Hill?

  20. Hah, I see we were on the same wavelength. I can’t drink those things myself :)

  21. MABlue–

    Thanks for the link to the Politico story. I never go to that place, but that piece was excellent.

  22. after watching the video, i think what may be the most damaging part — more so than his condescending remarks — is the laughter of the fat cats. check the background too, that aint fake wood panelling, a la hill’s boilermaker toss down images; beautiful. the WORM has definitely turned for you, my friend

  23. KO. I thought that stood for Keith Olbermann.

    I guess we better start a KO club

  24. Maybe we should call this one Kid O.

  25. No Quarter has a photoshopped version of an Obama poster that is being passed around on right wing sites

    http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/13/florida-caller-to-c-span-nails-the-crux-of-obamas-offensive-remarks-about-small-town-pennsylvanians/#more-2152

    Obama is dead meat.

  26. O/T

    40th Legislative district caucus results (WA state): 6/13 Clinton/Obama

    10th LD:
    2/5 Clinton/Obama

    Sen. Clinton picked up one delegate to the next round of caucuses and may have picked up two.

    Environment felt more hostile in this caucus than last weekend. I was called beeyotch twice for standing there with my Hillary shirt and cap on. There were a couple of other lovely little comments as well.

    Many situtations were enlightening.

    First bit:

    A Clinton stump speaker named Marta was shouted at during her speech. Marta is an older African-American woman who is a professional trainer and public speaker.

    She got up and said why she though Sen. Clinton should be the next president of the United States. She underlined that we need a Democrat in the White House. (can’t recall if she also said that if Sen. Obama had been called racial epithets, there would be uproar, but Sen. Clinton was routinely called “bitch,” and other lovely names without a word of protest from Obama supporters. That may have been someone else, though.)

    And then Marta said that there was no way Sen. Obama could win the general election because people will not vote for him because he’s African-American.

    It was a stunner.

    The Obama supporters booed and yelled no. One shouted: “Not here,” completely missing the point that people in Western Washington are not the only people who vote.

    They kept booing and yelling no until someone yelled, “Let her finish.”

    I have it all on videotape.

    Marta and I were talking later—we clicked immediately. She calls it as she sees it and so do I.

    I thanked her for speaking truth to power—it took guts. I also said I hoped in my heart she was wrong. She said the same thing, but her gut told her otherwise.

    As we were talking, several Obama supporters came up and thanked her for her guts. And then they looked at her and said, “I hope in my heart you are wrong. But I think you’re right.”

    One older man had tears in his eyes. We had this shared moment of shame right then. And we all accepted that there were people who would not vote for Sen. Clinton because she’s a woman, but there were a lot fewer, and she had a better chance of getting Rep and Ind women to vote for her because of her gender.

    Marta and I later discussed there are good reason besides bigotry not to vote for Sen. Obama, but her point was that there were enough people who would not vote for him because of that special flavor of bigotry. Democrats had to face it.

    Next bit:

    I go to these things to help run the thing and to represent. Usually I end up directing traffic because I don’t have a problem talking to strangers and feel information should be available to all.

    I do a lot of opening doors and carrying stuff. I don’t care whose side your on—you open the door for somebody if they need the door opened and can’t do it themselves.

    Twice I helped women who were in need of physical assistance. The first was a woman trying to get down two steps. She was using a cane and there was no railing. Obama supporters had crowded this little foyer (they were all wearing Obama buttons and nametags) and were talking politics as this woman was trying to find a way down.

    I stopped my conversation with an undecided delegate and helped her down the stairs. Arm around her waist, half in front to catch her if she fell, took her weight at each step. I know how to do this—my mom was a nurse, forcryinoutloud, and she taught all of us. The strong help the weak.

    I then directed the woman to the Obama hospitality room, which was where she was heading, and went back to the undecided delegate.

    The second—the delegate voting was over and a woman on crutches came from the auditorium and into the caefeteria, where I was in the Clinton hospitality area that I had tidied up, keeping an eye on everybody’s stuff and reading. Eight to ten Obama supporters were standing and sitting around talking very earnestly.

    A woman on crutches came in, a bag on her shoulder impeding her progress. She called out, asking if anyone knew where this specific exit was. A woman running for local office gave her directions.

    I walked over and offered to carry her bag. Her response: “But I’m one of those evil Obama people.”

    I had a moment where I almost handed her bag back. Instead, I offered to take her backpack as well. I walked her to her car and got her settled, then realized I had been locked out of the building. Had to walk all the way around to find an open door.

    It was bizarre. Nobody could carrry her bag from the area where Obama delegate voting was happening and to her car? Geez. She was on crutches and was clearly in some discomfort. Get off your ass and give her a hand.

    Third bit:

    I finally got proselytized. I can now mark that off my Obama Bingo card.

    I was helping direct traffic from the registration are to the hospitality area. I was sent there specifically because an Obama supporter was directing only Obama supporters to the Obama hospitality area.

    So I get my sign and stand next to the door near Aubrey—that was her name

    Aubrey was trying to outshout me—a pointless exercise as I’ve had a bit of voice training and I’m one of eight kids. I can make myself be heard. I finally turned to her and said, “Why don’t we point everybody to both rooms and work together to keep traffic moving?”

    This was definitely to her advantage, so she agreed.

    A couple of times she had to leave, so I took her Obama sign and held it up and kept directing traffic. I will admit at certain times when I had to hold both sign in one hand, I put the Obama sign below the Clinton sign. Heh.

    Anyway, Aubrey came up to me later as I was sitting in the cafeteria doing a delegate/alternate tally. She wanted to Talk About Unity. She wanted to do a short film on how I had reached out to her and we had worked together.

    Fine, whatever. I’m an indie moviemaker, so I have gear, post-prod equipemtn and people like to talk about making movies with me all the time.

    I said great. Then I said I wish Obama supporters would practice a little more of what they preached. She didn’t like that. her response was that Clinton supporters had been evil.

    I said, uh huh, but we’re not preaching unity. I then said, “And you know what? There are some people I don’t want to be unified with. Like Rep. Meeks. That guy hates queer people. Sorry, I value my civil rights more than his comofrt, so I have no desire to be on his side. Too bad your guy has him as another spiritual advisor.”

    Aubrey started the I’ve-always-fought-for-civil-rights thing, but I stopped it when I said, “Great, then see to it that your guy gives Rep./Rev. Meeks the boot.”

    I also said that when one candidate claims a mantle of unity, he’s implying that the other candidate does not offer unity. Is aid that was crap.

    She responded that it certainly could be taken as an elitist message.

    I said it wasn’t elitist; it was stupid. And wrong.

    She took a different tack. I haven’t smelled so much passive-aggressive bullshit in a very long time.

    You know how some people will keep smiling weirdly but their eyes get wide when they’re mad at something you said? Her corneas had white all the way around, but she kept that weird tight-lipped smile.

    Every time I outargued Aubrey, out would come another passive-aggressive slam against Sen. Clinton. For example, Aubrey emphasized that we must win this election.

    I responded that we (Democrats) needed to govern. That meant winning the White House and all the downticket races and beefing up the majorities in the House and Senate. Dems for a Day do not vote downticket (there was polling data to prove that) and if we don’t get the downticket votes, it doesn’t matter if we win the White House.

    Dem majorities in all the legislatures and county councils, along with House and Senate, means we can move the entire progressive agenda forward.

    Oooo, she got pissed that I had the better argument. First she insisted that I had misconstrued her words. I quoted them back to her. She then insisted I was twisting her words. I responded that I had built a counterargument based on what she said—that this was not about a single contest for the White House, but an entire shift in the political landscape.

    She responded with, ” ‘I was tired. I misspoke.’ ”

    ” ‘Oh, and I passed nuclear safety regulation. Oh, wait, no I didn’t.’ Sen. Obama said that in Iowa on the campaign trail. He’s a liar. Do you really want to go down this route?”

    No, she really didn’t. So then she started explaining that there was a lot of anger in her (very wealthy) neighborhood about Bill Clinton’s last two years in the White House.

    I asked if she meant that she would judge the merits of one candidate based on the behavior of her husband.

    She said no, but Sen. Clinton had a lot of baggage. And Bill Clinton spoke as her surrogate.

    I responded with, “Oh, we’re arguing surrogates now? Like how Jesse Jackson, Jr. compared Sen. Obama’s campaign to OJ? You know, ‘It’s like OJ—how do you attack a white woman’ ?”

    “She said, “It’s different.”

    “You spoke of Bill Clinton as her surrogate. We can argue about surrogates if you want.”

    Nope, didn’ want to argue that, either.

    So I asked again, “So you’re saying that you will not support Hillary Clinton based on her record of achievement and will instead judge her based on her husband?”

    “He’s a loose cannon.”

    “He’s a loose cannon? How come no one will ever admit that if Sen. Obama is the nominee, he will have two wepaons out there firing away at his opposition: Hillary and Bill Clinton. They are tried-and-true Democrats and will fight for the party and its nominee. When Bill Clinton does that, will he still be a loose cannon?”

    There was a pause and then she said, “Yes.”

    She tried to do the I-have-friends-who-are-therapists-who-think-he’s-a-sex-addict, but stopped quick when she saw I knew that was crap. She also tried the I-demonstrated-for-women’s-rights-in-the-1970s-so-that-makes-me-a-feminist thing, but I stopped that, too.

    If you judge a woman’s character and record based on her husband getting a blow-job and lying about it, you are not a feminist.

    Politically, Sen. Clinton will have issues regarding this, but Sen. Obama’s issues are equally large and he has less of a record of achievment.

    Ultimately, she said my mind wasn’t open or I’d truly hear what she was saying. So it’s okay to say that I’m the one whose mind is closed because I disagree with her terrible arguments.

    Of course, she had already closed her mind because of the BJ, but it’s okay for her not listen to rational argument.

    I can add that to the list: I’m now, stupid, racist, and close-minded since I have not accepted Barack Obama as my personal saviour.

    Lucky, lucky me.

  27. Ohio:

    I have to disagree with the idea that this country won’t elect a person of color as President.

    They will, but Obama is not that person.

  28. I think people would vote for Obama if he had as much experience and toughness as Hillary and if he weren’t an elitist snob who thinks he knows better than the rest of us.

  29. And if he weren’t calling so many Americans bigots.

  30. With the world in the mess that Bush is going to leave behind are we really looking at a candidate who has had a mere three years in the Senate and whose path to get there was to beat out Alan Keyes? We need experience and someone who can go toe to toe with the opposition and that is Hillary. Obama is a roll of the dice.

    Note: CNN at 8 tonight Hillary and Obama for 2 hours in PA. Should be interesting.

  31. First post, but I’ve been reading “religiously” for weeks. I have to say, I love this blog and the comments.

    To Ohio: thanks for your comments. I share your frustration when trying to have a discussion based on logic and facts and the other person just wants you to hear what they have to say and agree with them. Discussion: NO. Lecture: YES.

    A question regarding Sen Obama’s now famous “elitist” speech: I’ve seen no other comment about his “successive administrations.” After he blamed the bitterness on the Clinton and Bush administrations, he said “and successive administrations.” Did I miss something? Is Bush out of the White House and there’s another administration occupying it? This additional faux pas coming from the Great Orator. I realize that it’s not the important part of the speech, but obvious errors such as these drive me crazy. Just like his condescending comment about Sen Clinton, “she can stay in the race as long as she wants.” Did someone die and make Him God of the Democratic Primary, with the ability to GRANT Sen Clinton permission to run? Thanks Daddy.

    So good to find a group who ain’t gonna be good little girls anymore. THANKS Riverdaughter et al.

  32. Kid Oakland is a charlatan. A fraud. You folks know this already don’t you? He used to be my favorite blogger. He is now easily the most dishonest person blogging on the Left. And that is saying something.

  33. Wow!

    Is it really BTD, one of the heros of the real left blogosphere commenting here?

  34. If it’s really Armando, I’m both thrilled and honored. I was never a fan of Kid Oakland myself, but I’m a huge fan of Armando/BTD.

  35. Connie–

    Welcome, and please keep joining in the discussion. I did notice that part about the successive administrations. I don’t know what he means. It bugs me that Obama keeps tearing down Bill Clinton’s presidency though. I thought times were pretty good when he was in charge, but I guess Obama pines for St. Ronnie.

  36. myiq—Yes, but Marta’s statement was a heartbreaker. She was very clear—this was about winning votes, not the rightness or wrongness of racism because you don’t need an election to figure that one out.

    She definitely reinforced the belief that some Obama supporters have: That the only reason people won’t vote for Sen. Obama is because they are racist; while their support shows that they’re high-minded and not bigots.

    One will lose and election and one will win it. And this has nothing to do with Sen. Obama’s qualifications for the job or his supporters denigration of people who do not support him in this primary. She and I had that discussion later, though there wasn’t enough time to cover all of it.

    She did say that she thought the Republicans were too quiet. If Sen. Obama was the nominee, the Republicans would work him over so completely, his political career would be over. He would be a national joke.

    That would be a shame.

    Regardless, Marta’s right—some people will never vote for anyone who is African-American regardless of how well qualified he or she is. I’m pretty sure she meant Latino/Latina people, Asian people, etc., and not just white people.

    It is a practical question and I’m pretty sure all the campaigns are examining it.

    BB, agree.

  37. Here in Massachusetts Obama’s buddy Deval Patrick is in the process of building a multi million dollar home in the Berkshires. Also shopping his autobiography to NY publishers. Does not spend much time here in the state that he offered “change” and the lowering of property taxes. I consider him an elitist while I remain a schmuck for listening to his nonsense in the first place. Thanks David Axelrod for another snow job!

  38. Obama makes these comments when he’s pandering. He invoked Reagan while pandering to a right-wing newspaper and he revealed his classism while pandering to San Francisco millionaires.

  39. @Ohio: I wonder if these Obama supporters (read: Clinton haters*) realize that if Obama does take the nomination, he’ll desperately need us? Do they understand basic reality?

    The whole misogynistic bigotry is just too much. I hate how casually slurs are thrown around and without irony: how is it that the unity and hope candidate inspires such intolerance and hate amongst his most loyal devotees?

    *Honestly, I believe they only “support” Obama by default: they hate Clinton.

  40. In their hunger for power and their political cynicism, the Clintons have taken one passage from a speech by Barack Obama and staked the entire future of this campaign upon using that misconstrued passage to tear Senator Obama and the political movement behind him down.

    What an unbelievable naif.

    News flash: Obama does not have a movement, he has a political campaign.
    And Hillary Clinton gets to campaign too. Fair is fair, and if Obama can’t take the heat he should drop out of the race and get behind Hillary right now.

  41. My fear is that Obama will run as a third party candidate. When I described this scenario on Baby Blue last month, I got my ass beat. I’m a “known” commenter at Baby Blue with a benign reputation and I got clobbered. One of the responses was classic Obamadroid reasoning – projection. People claimed that I was supporting a third party Clinton run.

    Glad you all are here.

  42. Davidson, I made that point to Aubrey—you realize your guy will need us if he is the nominee? That was the entre into the whole Unity thing: talk your co-supporters into behaving better because you’re going to need us.

    She then insisted I tell Clinton supporters the same thing. So much for Sen. Obama’s certain nomination. Yes, it was the marked—she didn’t believe he was going to be the nominee anymore than I did.

    I’ve said it before: his supporters do not act like winners.

    Winners are gracious. His supporters—the ones I’ve met anyway—have no graciousness.

    I know this is weird and I have a partisan view. But winners can afford to be generous, even if it’s only paper-thin. One reason why I try to remain calm and good-humored at these events. It’s better for my blood pressure, it’s how I am naturally, and I’m wearing a Hillary hat and shirt and want to represent by the way I act.

    I try to behave in a non-partisan fashion. I may fail, but it costs me little to help carry a box out to someone’s car so I do it. So what’s the biggie?

    I think many of the Obama supporters I’ve met would prefer to lose and take on the martyrdom of being on the “morally right” side, than win and actually have to govern. You know, work. Not talk about working.

    I have no evidence. Just a weird feeling. And I am biased because I do support Sen. Clinton and people may be responding to my hat and shirt than they are to me, which again, kinda sucks.

    OTOH, I have also met a couple of Obama supporters (I can think of two in specific) who have been gracious. I cling to them in my bitterness.

    Heh. See how I fit that reference in there?

  43. Of course the Obama supporters would prefer matyrdom. When you’re dead you don’t have to do anything.

  44. @Ohio: Yes, I get the feeling the underlying theme of the Obama phenomenon is moral superiority (An especially hilarious belief considering the brutally polarizing tactics of The One and his supporters). Hence, the constant, baseless attacks upon Clinton–and her supporters–even when they actually believe Obama has the nomination secured. They need to feel they’re better than others and that the rest is just details. Just voting for him will magically fix everything! And if Obama becomes a political “martyr” in the GE, it’ll make their votes all the more “virtuous.”

    Meanwhile for the rest of us are rightfully terrified of the consequences.

  45. this sentence is the most interesting to me:

    The Clintons have no compunction about ripping the Democratic party apart and destroying the career of Barack Obama if it means they might yet win.

    the very Clintons he mentions have been on the receiving end of vicious attacks for 16 years now and they’re still standing, doing pretty well actually. but pointing out the negatives from ‘one passage from a speech’ Obama made will destroy his career???

    doesn’t sound like he’s made of the same stuff. even W, as much as I can’t stand him, keeps going in the face of adversity. politicians do that, they have thick skin, it’s a requirement. it’s not a Miss America pageant. if Obama just wants to be loved, he’s in the wrong profession.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 460 other followers

%d bloggers like this: