Polls for PA have shown quite a spread. The last one I posted from a day ago showed her with a 20 point lead. Either way the race is close enough where Obama can still lose. The doctor may be right though about this being more of a general election problem for Obama than one for the nomination.
Well, lets review what thedoctor said then..
Originally Posted By: thedoctor
I don't think the bitter comment is going to hurt Obama in the primaries as many snobby Democrats already hold the same concepts of middle America. It's the general election that that comment is going to come back and bite him in the ass.
Now this frankly doesn't make a lick of sense. So the very same working class PA voters that a couple of days ago were supposedly being looked down by Obama and the 'limousine liberals' have suddenly metamorphed into the very same "snobby Democrats" who were condescending to them??
And this happened how and why? Oh yeah, because Hillary's latest attack and the media frenzy over the weekend didn't end up hurting Obama much as everyone who was salivating over the prospect, expected. So because of this, suddenly these good gun totin', devout people get transformed into the same people who were talking shit about them???
(And yes thedoctor, i include PA voters specifically, because we were discussing them and their election and how the controversy really didn't hurt Obama there in 'the reddest of the blue states' as some expected and hoped..)
It couldn't be because as the Obama ad said, people frankly are tired of this kind of politics? It couldn't possibly be because people want substantive answers, not a candidate saving them from the guy who said they were "bitter". Yes, "vote for me and I'll make sure no one ever calls you bitter", regardless of whether your job gets sent overseas, at least you'll know someone isn't condescending to you.
Not overtly of course, just subtly by making one vote against your economic interest by presenting to you wedges and distractions that are supposed to matter more than health care, good jobs and a better future. Be it gay marriage, a flag lapel pin, or someone calling people who are down and out, bitter.
I think just in the biggest flaps Obama has faced, the Muslim crap, the Wright crap and now the bitter crap, it's not so much about Obama being some super untouchable Teflon candidate as it is about the electorate frankly being tired of politics as usual. And Hilary, as her cheap attack ad clearly shows, has a machine devoted to nothing but the same politics as usual. They pride themselves on it. They think they're better candidates because of it. And if these past few weeks have shown anything, it's that a good political machine and the same type of negative campaigns have finally reached the point of critical mass with people.
And along comes Obama. Nothing really spectacular about him. If you try, you can dig up something. But, he inspires people. He fills them with hope. He lets them dare to dream of something better than another cycle of the usual politics that frankly turn people off and make them tune out. And yes, his speeches are pretty. As MEM,who apparently is still pretty comfortable with the usual old type of politics and firmly believes in it's results, likes to insult backhandedly with faint praise.
Just like MLK's speeches were "just words" as Hillary also condescendingly reminded us. It's obvious they don't believe in the power of hope and inspiration. They laugh and ridicule it and dismiss it. Even as millions of new voters, all overwhelmingly Democratic and most 1st time young voters who apparently are to also be condescended by MEM, take part in the electoral process and participatory Democracy for the first time ever and who actually are following politics and issues for the first time ever.
Because Obama inspired them to. Not Hillary's machine and big donors and ethnic groups all subdivided all tidy and neatly.It's millions of people, finally hearing something and someone that causes them to give a damn about politics, turning the applecart on it's side, and one candidate, perhaps naive but naive enough not to know that you can't fight the established way of doing things, actually doing things a little different than everyone else.
It's pure Capra. Obama as Jefferson Smith. Millions of Americans will root for him and donate 20 bucks to him despite and even BECAUSE of the smear jobs he's faced with. He's already demonstrated this simple and obvious fact twice in recent weeks. I really don't see how Hillary's slime and distraction in this primary is any less potent than the coming right wing slime and distraction either.
More people will be voting in the general election though Whomod. BTW if this was much ado about nothing, why did Obama feel the need to do an ad & several days of either attacking Hillary or being sorry if the people couldn't understand what he meant?
There was also one poll with over half of the respondents dissagreeing with what Obama said. At any rate it will be interesting to see if this did indeed affect the PA race.
I don't think the bitter comment is going to hurt Obama in the primaries as many snobby Democrats already hold the same concepts of middle America. It's the general election that that comment is going to come back and bite him in the ass.
Now this frankly doesn't make a lick of sense. So the very same working class PA voters that a couple of days ago were supposedly being looked down by Obama and the 'limousine liberals' have suddenly metamorphed into the very same "snobby Democrats" who were condescending to them??
And this happened how and why? Oh yeah, because Hillary's latest attack and the media frenzy over the weekend didn't end up hurting Obama much as everyone who was salivating over the prospect, expected. So because of this, suddenly these good gun totin', devout people get transformed into the same people who were talking shit about them???
(And yes thedoctor, i include PA voters specifically, because we were discussing them and their election and how the controversy really didn't hurt Obama there in 'the reddest of the blue states' as some expected and hoped..)
I've never said that the comment was going to hurt him with the Democrats. As a matter of fact, I think there's really not going to be anything that's going to change the minds of people who had already decided that they were voting for him. In the general election that his words are going to hurt him when it comes to the independents (who won't be voting in the closed PA primaries) and moderates that will cast their votes.
As for the rest of your post that tongues Obama's asshole, I find him to be dishonest and two-faced. I know that those are common traits in politics and that every politician denies it; but I find it more offensive the more someone says that they're above and beyond such dishonesty as he has. And I don't at all like how he's used issues of race to get ahead. Rev. Wright is okay to spout hatred and racism in his church for 20+ years because he's a good guy if you just take the chance to get to know him. But Don Imus should be fired because he once uttered 'nappy-headed hos' on the radio. Fuck Obama.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
As for the rest of your post that tongues Obama's asshole, I find him to be dishonest and two-faced. I know that those are common traits in politics and that every politician denies it
Funny you should mention trust...
I won't make any comment on this finding from the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll because the thing speaks for itself -- and it should be speaking to superdelegates:
Quote:
Lost in the Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign's aggressive attacks on Barack Obama in recent days is a deep and enduring problem that threatens to undercut any inroads Clinton has made in her struggle to overtake him in the Democratic presidential race: She has lost trust among voters, a majority of whom now view her as dishonest.
Her advisers' efforts to deal with the problem -- by having her acknowledge her mistakes and crack self-deprecating jokes -- do not seem to have succeeded. Privately, the aides admit that the recent controversy over her claim to have ducked sniper fire on a trip to Bosnia probably made things worse.
Clinton is viewed as "honest and trustworthy" by just 39 percent of Americans, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, compared with 52 percent in May 2006. Nearly six in 10 said in the new poll that she is not honest and trustworthy. And now, compared with Obama, Clinton has a deep trust deficit among Democrats, trailing him by 23 points as the more honest, an area on which she once led both Obama and John Edwards.
The poll showed Obama leading Clinton by a ten-point margin: 51% - 41%.
Also in today's post is an op-ed from Doug Schoen , Mark Penn's business partner (or maybe not -- the firm is Penn, Schoen and Berland) basically telling Clinton to go negative and "undermine Obama's candidacy." It seems those consultant-types, who got Clinton into her current situation, can't help but give her bad advice.
Originally Posted By: thedoctor
but I find it more offensive the more someone says that they're above and beyond such dishonesty as he has. And I don't at all like how he's used issues of race to get ahead. Rev. Wright is okay to spout hatred and racism in his church for 20+ years because he's a good guy if you just take the chance to get to know him. But Don Imus should be fired because he once uttered 'nappy-headed hos' on the radio. Fuck Obama.
As for the rest of that. I'm frankly surprised. You usually show more restraint.
First off, I don't think he's said he's above and beyond dishonesty. Just that he wants to run a cleaner campaign with more substance and less politics as usual. Just like the race question, he's not running around saying that he's better or less prejudiced or anything. That's just the usual and convenient dismissal to people who simply try though.
As for Imus, that has nothing to do with Obama. It took me back because you essentially want Obama to "pay" for Rev. Wrights comments. Don Imus "paid" for his own comments. obama needs to pay for someone else's comments so you can feel a sense of racial payback? it sounds unusually bitter coming from you.
As for the rest of your post that tongues Obama's asshole, I find him to be dishonest and two-faced. I know that those are common traits in politics and that every politician denies it
Funny you should mention trust...
I won't make any comment on this finding from the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll because
Um... This may come as a surprise to you, but I've known that Hillary is a lying bitch for well over a decade.
Originally Posted By: whomod
As for Imus, that has nothing to do with Obama. It took me back because you essentially want Obama to "pay" for Rev. Wrights comments. Don Imus "paid" for his own comments. obama needs to pay for someone else's comments so you can feel a sense of racial payback? it sounds unusually bitter coming from you.
I'm not talking about Barack paying for Imus's comments. I'm talking about Barack paying for his own comments when it came to Don Imus and then his total 180 when the Rev. Wright affair hit the news. Here's a spoonful of truth for you. (btw, this is an actual ABC article and not a made up AP one )
Quote:
Obama: Fire Imus Obama First White House Contender to Call for Imus' Firing Over Racial Slur By JAKE TAPPER
April 11, 2007
In an interview with ABC News Wednesday afternoon, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., called for the firing of talk radio host Don Imus. Obama said he would never again appear on Imus' show, which is broadcast on CBS Radio and MSNBC television. Obama Imus
"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."
Obama said he appeared once on Imus' show two years ago, and "I have no intention of returning."
Racial Slur Stirs Trouble for Shock Jock
Last week, Imus referred to the Rutgers University women's basketball team, most of whom are African-American, as "nappy-headed hos." He has since apologized for his remarks, and CBS and MSNBC suspended his show for two weeks.
"He didn't just cross the line," Obama said. "He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America. The notions that as young African-American women -- who I hope will be athletes -- that that somehow makes them less beautiful or less important. It was a degrading comment. It's one that I'm not interested in supporting."
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
First off and as an aside, I NEVER made up any AP article nor did anyone else.
Second, again, you think he has to pay for Rev. Wright. Pay more I suppose. Now since he can't "fire' Rev. Wright since Wright doesn't work for him and he already disavowed his remarks, what else do you demand from him? That Obama cause him to lose his preaching job? He's no longer a preacher at Obama's church!
Now Imus was being paid to say that kind of stuff on the air. Wright I don't think is getting paid by Obama. You're trying to equalize two very different set of circumstances.
But honestly, it just sounds as if it boils down to you feeling white people are put upon unfairly and you're upset that Obama is doing so well despite some slip up's. And you see hypocrisy in Obama calling on NBC to deal with Imus.
Can you blame Obama for that though? He's not the one putting himself in such a great position? That is being done by the electorate. So pretty much the public has spoken on this issue as well as the Imus issue and it's closed for the most part. People found obama's disavowal sufficient and found Imus firing sufficient. Obama didn't cause Imus to be fired. That was on account of almost unanimous disgust with Imus' comments. And if there was any hypocrisy from Obama, the public certainly didn't think so. They found his handling of that situation sufficient.
People who share that sort of deep racial animus aern't going to vote for the guy anyway, regardless of Wright I think.
Second, again, you think he has to pay for Rev. Wright. Pay more I suppose. Now since he can't "fire' Rev. Wright since Wright doesn't work for him and he already disavowed his remarks, what else do you demand from him? That obama cause him to lose his preaching job? he's no longer a preacher at Obama's church!
Obama has put up that his lack of experience is made up for by his superior judgment. I can easily question the judgment of a man who stayed in a church that had a preacher promote racism and hatred for the 'white conspiracy', who took in that same preacher as his 'spiritual advisor', who associated himself so closely to that man, and who let this guy fill not only his and his wife's heads with that hatred but also his young daughters (who Obama likes to parade around in his excuses).
Originally Posted By: whomod
Now Imus was being paid to say that kind of stuff on the air. Wright I don't think is getting paid by Obama. You're trying to equalize two very different set of circumstances.
Obama wasn't paying Don Imus, yet he called for Imus to be fired. Obama did pay Rev. Wright to say what he said as a partitioner and contributor to the church. You forget that pastors (especially those of larger churches) are paid to give their sermons. So, which is worse? Don Imus muttering one phrase of 'nappy-headed hos' on a radio broadcast, or Rev. Wright using entire sermons to demonize entire races?
Originally Posted By: whomod
but honestly, it just sounds as if it boils down to you feeling white people are put upon unfairly and you're upset that Obama is doing so well despite some slip up's. Can you blame Obama for that though? he's not putting himself in such a great position? That is being done by the electorate. So pretty much the public has spoken on this issue and it's closed for the most part. people who share that sort of racial animus aern't going to vote for the guy anyway,regardless of Wright I think.
You're right. Questioning Obama is wrong because he's black. I should never have been foolish enough to question the ever-changing positions of a black man. He's black, so he should be without approach. Due to his blackness and all. As a matter of fact, I'm probably just being racist for not capitalizing black. It should be Black. Using a lowercase 'b' is just demeaning to Black people. I should have realized from the start that this wasn't about political and moral ideals but about Black vs. white. My God! I feel even more racist now that there isn't anything smaller than a lowercase 'w' for me to use. I mean the only way to subside the white guilt that must be mandatory for me to feel is to find some other way to further demean my whiteness against Obama's Blackness. Now that I look at it, there has to be something bigger than an uppercase 'B' to help further promote Obama's Blackness. I feel so horrible now.
PS Fuck you, you tool.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
Second, again, you think he has to pay for Rev. Wright. Pay more I suppose. Now since he can't "fire' Rev. Wright since Wright doesn't work for him and he already disavowed his remarks, what else do you demand from him? That obama cause him to lose his preaching job? he's no longer a preacher at Obama's church!
Obama has put up that his lack of experience is made up for by his superior judgment. I can easily question the judgment of a man who stayed in a church that had a preacher promote racism and hatred for the 'white conspiracy', who took in that same preacher as his 'spiritual advisor', who associated himself so closely to that man, and who let this guy fill not only his and his wife's heads with that hatred but also his young daughters (who Obama likes to parade around in his excuses).
Originally Posted By: whomod
Now Imus was being paid to say that kind of stuff on the air. Wright I don't think is getting paid by Obama. You're trying to equalize two very different set of circumstances.
Obama wasn't paying Don Imus, yet he called for Imus to be fired. Obama did pay Rev. Wright to say what he said as a partitioner and contributor to the church. You forget that pastors (especially those of larger churches) are paid to give their sermons. So, which is worse? Don Imus muttering one phrase of 'nappy-headed hos' on a radio broadcast, or Rev. Wright using entire sermons to demonize entire races?
Originally Posted By: whomod
but honestly, it just sounds as if it boils down to you feeling white people are put upon unfairly and you're upset that Obama is doing so well despite some slip up's. Can you blame Obama for that though? he's not putting himself in such a great position? That is being done by the electorate. So pretty much the public has spoken on this issue and it's closed for the most part. people who share that sort of racial animus aern't going to vote for the guy anyway,regardless of Wright I think.
You're right. Questioning Obama is wrong because he's black. I should never have been foolish enough to question the ever-changing positions of a black man. He's black, so he should be without approach. Due to his blackness and all. As a matter of fact, I'm probably just being racist for not capitalizing black. It should be Black. Using a lowercase 'b' is just demeaning to Black people. I should have realized from the start that this wasn't about political and moral ideals but about Black vs. white. My God! I feel even more racist now that there isn't anything smaller than a lowercase 'w' for me to use. I mean the only way to subside the white guilt that must be mandatory for me to feel is to find some other way to further demean my whiteness against Obama's Blackness. Now that I look at it, there has to be something bigger than an uppercase 'B' to help further promote Obama's Blackness. I feel so horrible now.
More people will be voting in the general election though Whomod. BTW if this was much ado about nothing, why did Obama feel the need to do an ad & several days of either attacking Hillary or being sorry if the people couldn't understand what he meant?
There was also one poll with over half of the respondents dissagreeing with what Obama said. At any rate it will be interesting to see if this did indeed affect the PA race.
The ad was in response to Hillary's low blow attack. And it was quite subduded. It shows voters rejecting Hillary's attacks and then asks that if that type of distraction changes the substantive issues they face in their daily lives. I don't think I detected any tit-for-tat.
Like i said, he responded and the pubic was satisfied. It's pretty much over now. Much to your chagrin I'm guessing.
We knew it would be a week of polling frenzy. And, it is. Two more today, both from credible and reliable pollsters. Both polls have undecideds in the range of 13-14%, so how the undecideds break is critical. But, think back a couple weeks and this race in PA wasn't supposed to be close. It was supposed to be a Clinton blowout.
The poll from Franklin & Marshall University and the Philadelphia Daily News has Clinton leading Obama by a 46% - 40% margin:
Quote:
WITH THE Pennsylvania primary six days away, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama has moved within striking distance of rival U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, according to a new Daily News/Franklin & Marshall Poll.
Clinton clung to a lead of 46 percent to 40 percent for Obama among likely Democratic voters, with 14 percent undecided. In March, Clinton led 51 percent to 35 percent.
But experts said that the survey may not fully show the impact of Obama's statements last week that small-town Americans are "bitter" over their economic status and "cling to guns or religion."
"It's too soon — you'd have to see polls taken Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday," said political consultant Neil Oxman. "It's clear [internal] polling in both campaigns show an uptick in support for her and a downtick for him."
This poll was conducted April 8 - 13, 2008. So, as instructed by Mr. Oxman, let's look at a poll conducted Monday and Tuesday (April 14th & 15th) from PPP Polling -- it shows an Obama lead: 45% - 42%, which is "a statistical tie":Barack
Quote:
It seems more clear with each passing day that Hillary Clinton's efforts to hurt Barack Obama for his 'bitter' remarks are not working. Earlier this week PPP showed Obama maintaining a 20 point lead in North Carolina, and now for the third week in a row we show the race in Pennsylvania as a statistical tie.
Obama's gain since PPP's poll last week is not attributable to any major shifts of support from any particular demographic. He simply cut Clinton's lead with whites and women, and increases his advantage with men and black voters.
High turnout in the metro Philadelphia area seems likely to be the key to Obama's success or failure. Right now he leads 53-33 in that region, with Clinton showing a strong advantage in most of the rest of the state.
Second, again, you think he has to pay for Rev. Wright. Pay more I suppose. Now since he can't "fire' Rev. Wright since Wright doesn't work for him and he already disavowed his remarks, what else do you demand from him? That obama cause him to lose his preaching job? he's no longer a preacher at Obama's church!
Obama has put up that his lack of experience is made up for by his superior judgment. I can easily question the judgment of a man who stayed in a church that had a preacher promote racism and hatred for the 'white conspiracy', who took in that same preacher as his 'spiritual advisor', who associated himself so closely to that man, and who let this guy fill not only his and his wife's heads with that hatred but also his young daughters (who Obama likes to parade around in his excuses).
Originally Posted By: whomod
Now Imus was being paid to say that kind of stuff on the air. Wright I don't think is getting paid by Obama. You're trying to equalize two very different set of circumstances.
Obama wasn't paying Don Imus, yet he called for Imus to be fired. Obama did pay Rev. Wright to say what he said as a partitioner and contributor to the church. You forget that pastors (especially those of larger churches) are paid to give their sermons. So, which is worse? Don Imus muttering one phrase of 'nappy-headed hos' on a radio broadcast, or Rev. Wright using entire sermons to demonize entire races?
Originally Posted By: whomod
but honestly, it just sounds as if it boils down to you feeling white people are put upon unfairly and you're upset that Obama is doing so well despite some slip up's. Can you blame Obama for that though? he's not putting himself in such a great position? That is being done by the electorate. So pretty much the public has spoken on this issue and it's closed for the most part. people who share that sort of racial animus aern't going to vote for the guy anyway,regardless of Wright I think.
You're right. Questioning Obama is wrong because he's black. I should never have been foolish enough to question the ever-changing positions of a black man. He's black, so he should be without approach. Due to his blackness and all. As a matter of fact, I'm probably just being racist for not capitalizing black. It should be Black. Using a lowercase 'b' is just demeaning to Black people. I should have realized from the start that this wasn't about political and moral ideals but about Black vs. white. My God! I feel even more racist now that there isn't anything smaller than a lowercase 'w' for me to use. I mean the only way to subside the white guilt that must be mandatory for me to feel is to find some other way to further demean my whiteness against Obama's Blackness. Now that I look at it, there has to be something bigger than an uppercase 'B' to help further promote Obama's Blackness. I feel so horrible now.
PS Fuck you, you tool.
No spin on Obama's hypocrisy and bad judgment? Just the dismissal of my good points simply because I called out your bullshit?
Just further proof that you've been bitch slapped.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
[quote=whomod]Second, again, you think he has to pay for Rev. Wright. Pay more I suppose. Now since he can't "fire' Rev. Wright since Wright doesn't work for him and he already disavowed his remarks, what else do you demand from him? That obama cause him to lose his preaching job? he's no longer a preacher at Obama's church!
Obama has put up that his lack of experience is made up for by his superior judgment. I can easily question the judgment of a man who stayed in a church that had a preacher promote racism and hatred for the 'white conspiracy', who took in that same preacher as his 'spiritual advisor', who associated himself so closely to that man, and who let this guy fill not only his and his wife's heads with that hatred but also his young daughters (who Obama likes to parade around in his excuses).
Originally Posted By: whomod
Now Imus was being paid to say that kind of stuff on the air. Wright I don't think is getting paid by Obama. You're trying to equalize two very different set of circumstances.
Obama wasn't paying Don Imus, yet he called for Imus to be fired. Obama did pay Rev. Wright to say what he said as a partitioner and contributor to the church. You forget that pastors (especially those of larger churches) are paid to give their sermons. So, which is worse? Don Imus muttering one phrase of 'nappy-headed hos' on a radio broadcast, or Rev. Wright using entire sermons to demonize entire races?
Originally Posted By: whomod
but honestly, it just sounds as if it boils down to you feeling white people are put upon unfairly and you're upset that Obama is doing so well despite some slip up's. Can you blame Obama for that though? he's not putting himself in such a great position? That is being done by the electorate. So pretty much the public has spoken on this issue and it's closed for the most part. people who share that sort of racial animus aern't going to vote for the guy anyway,regardless of Wright I think.
You're right. Questioning Obama is wrong because he's black. I should never have been foolish enough to question the ever-changing positions of a black man. He's black, so he should be without approach. Due to his blackness and all. As a matter of fact, I'm probably just being racist for not capitalizing black. It should be Black. Using a lowercase 'b' is just demeaning to Black people. I should have realized from the start that this wasn't about political and moral ideals but about Black vs. white. My God! I feel even more racist now that there isn't anything smaller than a lowercase 'w' for me to use. I mean the only way to subside the white guilt that must be mandatory for me to feel is to find some other way to further demean my whiteness against Obama's Blackness. Now that I look at it, there has to be something bigger than an uppercase 'B' to help further promote Obama's Blackness. I feel so horrible now.
PS Fuck you, you tool.
No spin on Obama's hypocrisy and bad judgment? Just the dismissal of my good points simply because I called out your bullshit?
Actually it was just disapointing to read your bitterness with black people. And you might argue that you were parodying something but it sounded like if you harbor a lot of racial animosity. the kind you accuse Obama of.
BTW, you're a mod, if you want to discuss obama exclusively, it'd be a good idea to move this particular conversation to the Obama thread.
The problem is that, while this may seem insignificant, it feeds into a growing pattern of deception from the Clinton campaign that is, according to the polls, increasingly hurting Hillary's credibility among voters. This is the kind of thing that will most certainly be used by the Republicans in the fall, should Hillary become the nominee. One of their favorite, and most effective, attacks is labeling Democrats as liars. From the Chicago Trib:
Quote:
Clyde Thomas, who sports a goatee in the ad and says, “the good people of Pennsylvania deserve a lot better than what Barack Obama said,” is actually registered in New Jersey. He voted there for Clinton Feb. 5.
I honestly don't know just how much more deception Hillary's campaign can release without ever stopping and saying "waitaminute! people are looking out for this, maybe it'd be a good idea for us to stop lying..?"
Actually it was just disapointing to read your bitterness with black people. And you might argue that you were parodying something but it sounded like if you harbor a lot of racial animosity. the kind you accuse Obama of.
BTW, you're a mod, if you want to discuss obama exclusively, it'd be a good idea to move this particular conversation to the Obama thread.
More sidestepping.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
Second, again, you think he has to pay for Rev. Wright. Pay more I suppose. Now since he can't "fire' Rev. Wright since Wright doesn't work for him and he already disavowed his remarks, what else do you demand from him? That obama cause him to lose his preaching job? he's no longer a preacher at Obama's church!
Obama has put up that his lack of experience is made up for by his superior judgment. I can easily question the judgment of a man who stayed in a church that had a preacher promote racism and hatred for the 'white conspiracy', who took in that same preacher as his 'spiritual advisor', who associated himself so closely to that man, and who let this guy fill not only his and his wife's heads with that hatred but also his young daughters (who Obama likes to parade around in his excuses).
Again, this Rev. Wright story is pretty much over and done... except among white male conservatives. Everyone else has moved on but guys like you want to continue to draw blood from a stone. So not to say you're just making political hay out of an old story. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that it really does concern you. I read this today and found it insightful.
Quote:
Clinton surely had no racial intent, but none is needed for a racial impact. In a society long steeped in stereotypes, such comments reverberate. The incessant loop of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. cursing America and repeating old conspiracy theories has revived fears of black anger among whites whose threshold of tolerance for such rage has always been low. No matter that Obama seems anything but angry. A few sentences from his pastor are enough to incite such anxieties.
Regardless that to many blacks, such rage among it's older generation is very much real and not as surprising and worrisome as this group of conservative whites seems to feel it is. The fact that it's surprising should at least be telling that some whites really have no idea what many blacks think and feel. Which is why a dialouge is needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted By: whomod
Now Imus was being paid to say that kind of stuff on the air. Wright I don't think is getting paid by Obama. You're trying to equalize two very different set of circumstances.
Obama wasn't paying Don Imus, yet he called for Imus to be fired. Obama did pay Rev. Wright to say what he said as a partitioner and contributor to the church. You forget that pastors (especially those of larger churches) are paid to give their sermons. So, which is worse? Don Imus muttering one phrase of 'nappy-headed hos' on a radio broadcast, or Rev. Wright using entire sermons to demonize entire races?
See, that's the right wing spin again. And it suggests a wariness if not outright fear of black rage. Almost as if some people in the back of their head think that Obama is going to lead the charge of militant racial revenge for slavery and Jim Crow or something if he's elected. The fact that no one else thinks that race hatred is what this church was all about should clue you in that perhaps it's just conservative paranoia and exploiting racial division at work yet again.
Yes, Wright said some questionable things. As I hear MANY, I repeat MANY older black people utter EVERY-SINGLE-DAY. Most people, myself and most blacks I see amongst them, just shrug it off and ignore it as the lingering bitterness and resentment of a hard life. That Wright still harbors some bitterness and resenment doesn't man that this is all he's about. That's caricature. And because Wright is bitter doesn't translate to Obama is bitter.
A Lot of these older men that I see happen to have kids and grandkids that have an even closer and longer lasting relationship than Obama does to Wright and some of them are intermarried, as Obama's own parents are intermarried or are just regular unbitter, open people despite the close and longstanding contact with people who still harbor soem of that racial sting.
What i see you doing is trying to rub off Wrights anger onto Obama in some attempt to paint him as unacceptable. Obama has responded to wright. I don't think ANYTHING he says would be acceptable to you though. You think angry people should just I dunoo.. disappear so you can be comfortable that no one is mad at white folk anymore?
Quote:
Originally Posted By: whomod
but honestly, it just sounds as if it boils down to you feeling white people are put upon unfairly and you're upset that Obama is doing so well despite some slip up's. Can you blame Obama for that though? he's not putting himself in such a great position? That is being done by the electorate. So pretty much the public has spoken on this issue and it's closed for the most part. people who share that sort of racial animus aern't going to vote for the guy anyway,regardless of Wright I think.
You're right. Questioning Obama is wrong because he's black. I should never have been foolish enough to question the ever-changing positions of a black man. He's black, so he should be without approach. Due to his blackness and all. As a matter of fact, I'm probably just being racist for not capitalizing black. It should be Black. Using a lowercase 'b' is just demeaning to Black people. I should have realized from the start that this wasn't about political and moral ideals but about Black vs. white. My God! I feel even more racist now that there isn't anything smaller than a lowercase 'w' for me to use. I mean the only way to subside the white guilt that must be mandatory for me to feel is to find some other way to further demean my whiteness against Obama's Blackness. Now that I look at it, there has to be something bigger than an uppercase 'B' to help further promote Obama's Blackness. I feel so horrible now.
PS Fuck you, you tool.
And here's why I at you. You sound genuinely resentful of black people here. Just in general. Here's where the problem with Obama crystallized. No that he's a Muslim. Not that he's a militant black. But that he's a black and you can't criticize blacks and they hold race over you and you're being diminished as a white man.
Plus the "fuck you" just sounds as if you're angry and frustrated that the Wright brouhaha didn't stop Obama and now this "bitter" thing didn't do it either. And my support of Obama pisses you off. The black man is going to be President and then you'll really get it from all sides. So the bitch slap picture might comfort you a bit. It still smacks of frustration and anger that Clinton can't stop Obama. And that's all I really care about. That you think this affects anything is like I said, comforting to you but ultimately meaningless and childish.
Which is anthoer mystifying thing all about this election.
All of a sudden, Hillary Clinton, the longstanding right wing poster woman for liberalism and all it's evils suddenly is being rooted on by all corners of the right wing and conservative world.
During the past week, Sen. Hillary Clinton has presented herself as a working class populist, the politician in touch with small town sentiments, compared to the elitism of her opponent, Sen. Barack Obama.
But a telling anecdote from her husband's administration shows Hillary Clinton's attitudes about the "lunch-bucket Democrats" are not exactly pristine.
In January 1995, as the Clintons were licking their wounds from the 1994 congressional elections, a debate emerged at a retreat at Camp David. Should the administration make overtures to working class white southerners who had all but forsaken the Democratic Party? The then-first lady took a less than inclusive approach.
"Screw 'em," she told her husband. "You don't owe them a thing, Bill. They're doing nothing for you; you don't have to do anything for them."
The statement -- which author Benjamin Barber witnessed and wrote about in his book, "The Truth of Power: Intellectual Affairs in the Clinton White House" -- was prompted by another speaker raising the difficulties of reaching "Reagan Democrats." It stands in stark contrast to the attitude the New York Democrat has recently taken on the campaign trail, in which she has presented herself as the one candidate who understands the working-class needs.
Stark contrast, indeed. It is important to remember that Hillary Clinton (and John McCain) are making an issue of Obama's recent remarks. It is important to remember that Hillary Clinton, not John McCain, is running almost exclusively negative ads in Pennsylvania about Obama's remarks. I'm just saying, this wouldn't be THE issue, if Clinton didn't make it THE only issue for her campaign.
Second, again, you think he has to pay for Rev. Wright. Pay more I suppose. Now since he can't "fire' Rev. Wright since Wright doesn't work for him and he already disavowed his remarks, what else do you demand from him? That obama cause him to lose his preaching job? he's no longer a preacher at Obama's church!
Obama has put up that his lack of experience is made up for by his superior judgment. I can easily question the judgment of a man who stayed in a church that had a preacher promote racism and hatred for the 'white conspiracy', who took in that same preacher as his 'spiritual advisor', who associated himself so closely to that man, and who let this guy fill not only his and his wife's heads with that hatred but also his young daughters (who Obama likes to parade around in his excuses).
Again, this Rev. Wright story is pretty much over and done... except among white male conservatives. Everyone else has moved on but guys like you want to continue to draw blood from a stone. So not to say you're just making political hay out of an old story. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that it really does concern you. I read this today and found it insightful.
Quote:
Clinton surely had no racial intent, but none is needed for a racial impact. In a society long steeped in stereotypes, such comments reverberate. The incessant loop of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. cursing America and repeating old conspiracy theories has revived fears of black anger among whites whose threshold of tolerance for such rage has always been low. No matter that Obama seems anything but angry. A few sentences from his pastor are enough to incite such anxieties.
Regardless that to many blacks, such rage among it's older generation is very much real and not as surprising and worrisome as this group of conservative whites seems to feel it is. The fact that it's surprising should at least be telling that some whites really have no idea what many blacks think and feel. Which is why a dialouge is needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted By: whomod
Now Imus was being paid to say that kind of stuff on the air. Wright I don't think is getting paid by Obama. You're trying to equalize two very different set of circumstances.
Obama wasn't paying Don Imus, yet he called for Imus to be fired. Obama did pay Rev. Wright to say what he said as a partitioner and contributor to the church. You forget that pastors (especially those of larger churches) are paid to give their sermons. So, which is worse? Don Imus muttering one phrase of 'nappy-headed hos' on a radio broadcast, or Rev. Wright using entire sermons to demonize entire races?
See, that's the right wing spin again. And it suggests a wariness if not outright fear of black rage. Almost as if some people in the back of their head think that Obama is going to lead the charge of militant racial revenge for slavery and Jim Crow or something if he's elected. The fact that no one else thinks that race hatred is what this church was all about should clue you in that perhaps it's just conservative paranoia and exploiting racial division at work yet again.
Yes, Wright said some questionable things. As I hear MANY, I repeat MANY older black people utter EVERY-SINGLE-DAY. Most people, myself and most blacks I see amongst them, just shrug it off and ignore it as the lingering bitterness and resentment of a hard life. That Wright still harbors some bitterness and resenment doesn't man that this is all he's about. That's caricature. And because Wright is bitter doesn't translate to Obama is bitter.
A Lot of these older men that I see happen to have kids and grandkids that have an even closer and longer lasting relationship than Obama does to Wright and some of them are intermarried, as Obama's own parents are intermarried or are just regular unbitter, open people despite the close and longstanding contact with people who still harbor soem of that racial sting.
What i see you doing is trying to rub off Wrights anger onto Obama in some attempt to paint him as unacceptable. Obama has responded to wright. I don't think ANYTHING he says would be acceptable to you though. You think angry people should just I dunoo.. disappear so you can be comfortable that no one is mad at white folk anymore?
You are utterly retarded. Nowhere did you even come close to addressing Obama's hypocrisy for calling for Imus's firing from radio for one utterance while he tried to build up a man who had a history of crazy 'the white man is after us' conspiracy theories in a church. That's what my point was about. It's about Obama's varying judgment and stances on similar instances. That's my problem with him. It's not because he's black. It's because he has a sliding morality. But you're unwilling to actual consider that I have a problem with his politics and morality. I say it is you who wants to turn this into a issue of racism since you're the fucknut who keeps bringing it up to keep from having to address the issues I've actually put forth. It's easier for you to say that I'm racist or scared of a black president instead of looking at the facts I've put before you. That's why I wrote:
Quote:
You're right. Questioning Obama is wrong because he's black. I should never have been foolish enough to question the ever-changing positions of a black man. He's black, so he should be without approach. Due to his blackness and all. As a matter of fact, I'm probably just being racist for not capitalizing black. It should be Black. Using a lowercase 'b' is just demeaning to Black people. I should have realized from the start that this wasn't about political and moral ideals but about Black vs. white. My God! I feel even more racist now that there isn't anything smaller than a lowercase 'w' for me to use. I mean the only way to subside the white guilt that must be mandatory for me to feel is to find some other way to further demean my whiteness against Obama's Blackness. Now that I look at it, there has to be something bigger than an uppercase 'B' to help further promote Obama's Blackness. I feel so horrible now.
PS Fuck you, you tool.
I was making fun of your bullshit tactics. And that 'Fuck you' was for you only because, as I said, you're a fucking tool.
Originally Posted By: whomod
And here's why I at you. You sound genuinely resentful of black people here. Just in general. Here's where the problem with Obama crystallized. No that he's a Muslim. Not that he's a militant black. But that he's a black and you can't criticize blacks and they hold race over you and you're being diminished as a white man.
Plus the "fuck you" just sounds as if you're angry and frustrated that the Wright brouhaha didn't stop Obama and now this "bitter" thing didn't do it either. And my support of Obama pisses you off. The black man is going to be President and then you'll really get it from all sides. So the bitch slap picture might comfort you a bit. It still smacks of frustration and anger that Clinton can't stop Obama. And that's all I really care about. That you think this affects anything is like I said, comforting to you but ultimately meaningless and childish.
Which is anthoer mystifying thing all about this election.
All of a sudden, Hillary Clinton, the longstanding right wing poster woman for liberalism and all it's evils suddenly is being rooted on by all corners of the right wing and conservative world.
Just weird. Weird and sad.
Once again you pull out the 'you must be a racist' card because it's easier for you to handle that than the hypocrisies of Obama. You also decide to spin your bullshit further by thinking that I want Hillary to win. Fuck if I want either to win. As I've said, I've known for years what a dirty, lying bitch she is. I've never said that I want her to win (though I am enjoying watching her stretch this bastard out like she has). You're making shit up to bolster your own skewed arguments again, which seems to be your MO. But you say I'm bitter. I guess that means that I needs to buy muh-self a pistol, go to church, and slap some damn, dirty Mexicans and Negroes around.
The fact of the matter is is that you don't know me. You have no idea who I am. You know jack about where I grew up, under what conditions, or under what beliefs. There's no way in Hell that you know what's in my mind and my heart, yet that hasn't stopped you from making accusations. You're a fucking tool, plain and simple. You'll suck Obama's dick all the way to the general election and beyond. Until you realize that your fanaticism for Obama is no different the MEM's for Hillary, you will for always and forever remain a douchebag tool. And that's what's really truly sad about all of this.
PS Fuck you, you fucking tool
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
During the past week, Sen. Hillary Clinton has presented herself as a working class populist, the politician in touch with small town sentiments, compared to the elitism of her opponent, Sen. Barack Obama.
But a telling anecdote from her husband's administration shows Hillary Clinton's attitudes about the "lunch-bucket Democrats" are not exactly pristine.
In January 1995, as the Clintons were licking their wounds from the 1994 congressional elections, a debate emerged at a retreat at Camp David. Should the administration make overtures to working class white southerners who had all but forsaken the Democratic Party? The then-first lady took a less than inclusive approach.
"Screw 'em," she told her husband. "You don't owe them a thing, Bill. They're doing nothing for you; you don't have to do anything for them."
The statement -- which author Benjamin Barber witnessed and wrote about in his book, "The Truth of Power: Intellectual Affairs in the Clinton White House" -- was prompted by another speaker raising the difficulties of reaching "Reagan Democrats." It stands in stark contrast to the attitude the New York Democrat has recently taken on the campaign trail, in which she has presented herself as the one candidate who understands the working-class needs.
This really surprises you?
You probably don't remember this, but as early as the 1993 inaugeration of Bill, Hillary was demonstrating contempt for the "little people":
On January 21, 1993, Bill's first full day in office, she and Bill shook some 1,800 hands in three hours.
"We just screwed all these people," she whispered to her husband - a comment heard on network television.
Fuck off! It’s enough that I have to see you shit-kickers every day. I’m not going to talk to you, too. Just do your goddamn job and keep your mouth shut. Said to her Arkansas state trooper bodyguards, after one of them deigned to greet her with “good morning.” (American Evita, p. 90)
Personal, trained pigs. Gary Aldrich reported, “(Hillary) had a clear dislike for the agents (U.S. Secret Service), bordering on hatred.…
If you want to remain on this detail, get your fucking ass over here and grab those bags. Hillary to a Secret Service agent who wanted to keep his hands free in case of an incident (as he was trained and supposed to do) and who, therefore, was hesitant to carry her bags.
Stay the fuck back, stay the fuck away from me! Don’t come within ten yards of me, or else! … Just fucking do as I say, okay! To the Secret Service agents (Unlimited Access, p. 139). In A Matter of Character (p. 2), Ron Kessler wrote “Secret Service agents assigned at various points to guard Hillary during her campaign for the Senate were dismayed at how two-faced and unbalanced she was.”
Bimbos, sluts, trailer trash, rednecks, and shit-kickers … Terms Hillary commonly used to describe Arkansans (American Evita, p. 139)
Goddamn L.D., did you see that family right out of "Deliverance"? Get me the hell out of here. To L.D. Brown, her bodyguard, while at a county fair in Arkansas during the early 80's. They had just spoken to folks in bib overalls and cotton dresses.
This is the kind of shit I have to put up with. To a friend after a Clinton supporter had given her earrings shaped like Arkansas Razorbacks (Blood Sport, p. 105)
I want to get this shit over with and get these damn people out of here. Hillary overheard on the governor’s mansion intercom as some preschoolers posed on the mansion lawn for a photograph (The First Partner, p. 192)
Just keep smiling until these assholes get their pictures. To Bill while they were posing for photographers (American Evita, p. 114)
Who in the hell asked you? To a staffer who expressed a view that she disagreed with (American Evita, p. 125)
She’s a short, Irish bitch. Regarding New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd (Newsmax.com quoting The New York Post, 07/25/00)
You fucking Jew bastard. On campaign manager Paul Fray the night of Bill Clinton’s defeat for the House of Representatives in 1974 (The State of A Union, p. 153)
You all remember Mahatma Ghandi. He ran a gas station down in St. Louis. During a speech at a Democrat fundraiser (CNN, 01/04/04). Senator Clinton was later forced to apologize.
My name is Hillary Clinton. You going to vote in the primary? Hillary to a homeless man in New York City on election day (Newsmax.com, 12/07/99)
Well, good for you. Hillary’s response to another homeless man when he tells her, “I’m homeless,” while she was campaigning in New York City. After inquiring of his voting status, Hillary promptly left (Hannity & Colmes, 08/16/02)
Jew bastard … Jew motherfucker. Common insults that both Hillary and Bill Clinton used with each other and towards others who angered them, according to former bodyguard Larry Patterson (The State of A Union, p. 155)
(You) motherfucking Jew. Hillary to Bill (Bitter Legacy, p. 11)
During the past week, Sen. Hillary Clinton has presented herself as a working class populist, the politician in touch with small town sentiments, compared to the elitism of her opponent, Sen. Barack Obama.
But a telling anecdote from her husband's administration shows Hillary Clinton's attitudes about the "lunch-bucket Democrats" are not exactly pristine.
In January 1995, as the Clintons were licking their wounds from the 1994 congressional elections, a debate emerged at a retreat at Camp David. Should the administration make overtures to working class white southerners who had all but forsaken the Democratic Party? The then-first lady took a less than inclusive approach.
"Screw 'em," she told her husband. "You don't owe them a thing, Bill. They're doing nothing for you; you don't have to do anything for them."
The statement -- which author Benjamin Barber witnessed and wrote about in his book, "The Truth of Power: Intellectual Affairs in the Clinton White House" -- was prompted by another speaker raising the difficulties of reaching "Reagan Democrats." It stands in stark contrast to the attitude the New York Democrat has recently taken on the campaign trail, in which she has presented herself as the one candidate who understands the working-class needs.
This really surprises you?
You probably don't remember this, but as early as the 1993 inaugeration of Bill, Hillary was demonstrating contempt for the "little people":
On January 21, 1993, Bill's first full day in office, she and Bill shook some 1,800 hands in three hours.
"We just screwed all these people," she whispered to her husband - a comment heard on network television.
Clinton picks up union endorsement By Nedra Pickler
Associated Press Writer / April 16, 2008
WASHINGTON—Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton won the endorsement of a union representing plasterers and cement masons in the construction industry.
The 45,000-member Operative Plasterers' and Cement Masons' International Association timed its endorsement for Clinton's speech Wednesday before the AFL-CIO's Building Trades National Legislative Conference. Clinton announced the support when she took the stage and said she was grateful and honored.
Union President Pat Finley said in a statement that Clinton has the ability to turn around the economy and rebuild the middle class.
"She has a clear record fighting for working families, and is the strongest candidate to go toe-to-toe with John McCain in November," Finley said.
Did you guys see Hillary on the news drinking beer at a bar? It was a stunt to show she was just like anyone else. It was a good stunt that almost worked. Until she tried to pay for her drinks with a million dollar bill
However, I'd say Hillary will benefit marginally from last night's debate and to a greater degree from Obama's recent slip-ups. If she does not win Pennsylvania next week, probably even by a comfortable margin, it will be surprising. Unless Obama gets a bump coming out of North Carolina, Hillary may well win Indiana too.
That said, I think her performance last night also angered the people she needs most to win and, as a result, closing the deficit in the popular vote and pledged delegates still seems out of reach.
Frankly, for Hillary this may be a nomination not worth having at this point. She can only get it under conditions that are likely to embitter some of the youngest and most idealistic new Democratic voters, demoralize and anger black voters, and divide the party going into a general election race against a reasonably strong Republican candidate.
I don't know if there is anything to theory that Hillary is trying to ensure Obama's defeat in November, but it would make some sense.
I didn't catch the first part of the debate where I guess she really laid into him but thought she did better answering questions in the second half. It was kind of annoying for me the Hillary backer watching Obama stumble & ramble his way through the debate. He has trouble with out a telaprompter or if he has to venture to far off from his canned inpirational speach.
At this point Hillary has to go negative big time & try to knock him out.
At this point Hillary has to go negative big time...
I would respectfully note that some of us have observed for several months that Hillary had already gone 'negative big time' and you seemed to deny that she had.
At this point Hillary has to go negative big time...
I would respectfully note that some of us have observed for several months that Hillary had already gone 'negative big time' and you seemed to deny that she had.
They both been going negative the last couple of months. What I meant is that I think she has to turn up the heat even further.
Given the fair amount of evidence that she may have been behind various "dirty tricks" over the past year it would be interesting to see what "turn up the heat even further" consists of.
Given the fair amount of evidence that she may have been behind various "dirty tricks" over the past year it would be interesting to see what "turn up the heat even further" consists of.
Well to put that into context, you also believe there is a fair amount of evidence that Obama is a muslim correct?
Is it your contention that Hillary is going to "turn the heat up" and blame that "heat" on conservatives?
Your question seems insincere. I never said that any negative attack on Obama was a case of Hillary blaming it on conservatives. Do you feel that I do that?
) 
