Ticomaya
 
  1  
Thu 10 Jan, 2008 08:19 pm
teenyboone wrote:
I recceived the SAME email, went to snopes.com and Snopes says it's FALSE! Cool Cool Cool


Wait .... are you saying his mother's NOT from Wichita????
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Thu 10 Jan, 2008 08:23 pm
Kickycan - that is scary and depressing...

But in a way it's good to know what you'd be in for if Obama will be the nominee. The shitstorm will be no less dirty than that which erupted around the Clintons when they first came on the national stage; to think otherwise I think is naive.

Here's a sobering assessment of what would be coming that I just read. It mentions the "e-mail barrages [in which] he is being portrayed as the son and stepson of Muslims from Africa and Asia, who worshipped in mosques and madrasas as a young boy", which you just posted an example of.

But it also previews other themes the smearing will centre around. For example how his pastor, who is "a close friend and spiritual adviser to the Obama family", will be "depicted as a raving black nationalist and a proud associate of Louis Farrakhan". Newsmax already warned that "if Obama is his party's nominee, his Republican opponent will [..] make use of Rev. Wright and his radical teachings as effectively as supporters of George H.W. Bush used Willie Horton's furlough".

Quote:
The Coming Attack on Barack

A Commentary by Joe Conason

Thursday, January 10, 2008

"They will try to Swift Boat me," said Barack Obama in the days before the New Hampshire primary, looking forward to the Democratic nomination that he still believes will be his, with a prediction both accurate and chilling.

Whether he can go on to claim the nomination is yet to be determined. Much more predictable is the nature of the campaign that would be waged against him -- and the fickleness of the national press corps if and when that ugly process eventually reaches its nadir.

The effective template for attacking a Democratic nominee was developed by former Republican political boss Karl Rove during decades of trench warfare in Texas and across the country. While Rove may only whisper advice from the sidelines next fall, his approach can be easily copied by lesser talents: Seize upon the Democrat's most attractive quality and sow doubts to undermine that appeal. With candidates such as John Kerry and Max Cleland, that meant tearing down their records as war heroes and raising questions about their patriotism.

With Obama, the obvious target is his inspirational life story. The task of the opposition operatives will be to twist that saga, to unearth facts or factoids that raise concerns about the candidate's background, and to make his cosmopolitan upbringing appear alien and even sinister -- and of course, to play the race card against him, either subtly or blatantly. These themes will begin to appear in the right-wing press, which is of course where the original Swift Boat smears first showed up four years ago.

Indeed, that process has begun, and is accelerating along with Obama's drive toward the nomination. Conservatives will briefly applaud him for defeating Hillary Clinton, the immediate object of their hatred, and then turn on him as the next target. Denigrating material about the front-runner -- whose popularity and skill they clearly fear -- will be ready for deployment very shortly, but will not be aired until his nomination is a certainty.

Meanwhile, certain themes are being tested on the websites of the extreme right. The basic concept is to suggest that Obama is somehow less wholesome than he appears to be, and to provoke bigoted responses. On these sites and in e-mail barrages, he is being portrayed as the son and stepson of Muslims from Africa and Asia, who worshipped in mosques and madrasas as a young boy. That is a proven falsehood surrounding a tiny grain of fact, but no matter. Repetition will make the poison.

Next will come questions about the Chicago church he attends, whose eccentric pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is a close friend and spiritual adviser to the Obama family. In an article published on the Newsmax website just days ago, Wright is depicted as a raving black nationalist and a proud associate of Louis Farrakhan. He is prone to polarizing remarks about a wide range of topics, from Jews and Israel to the disappearance of Natalee Holloway.

The Newsmax article on the relationship between Obama and Wright displays at least one aspect of the campaign under construction on the right. Although such websites may seem marginal, they are not -- and more powerful forces are clearly indicating their interest in these same lines of attack.

Brad Blakeman, a former Bush White House aide who now runs Freedom's Watch, a political committee funded by major Republican donors that has aired several pro-war commercials, told Newsmax he was aware of the Wright connection.

"If your spiritual adviser makes outrageous statements, it's incumbent on you as a leader to denounce those statements," he said. "Silence is an admission that you agree with what your spiritual adviser pronounces."

Newsmax concluded that "if Obama is his party's nominee, his Republican opponent will rightly be able to make use of Rev. Wright and his radical teachings as effectively as supporters of George H.W. Bush used Willie Horton's furlough to help Bush win the presidency." In other words, be prepared for the attack ads to be aired by Freedom's Watch and other shadowy, well-funded organizations, just like the Horton ads put up by an earlier "independent committee" in 1988.

The unscrupulous right wing will do exactly the same thing to Hillary Clinton if she wins the nomination -- except that those smears will have to be reruns.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:27 pm
WHO IS OBAMA?
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:29 pm
nimh wrote:
Amigo wrote:
joefromchicago wrote:
I agree. But don't be too hard on Clinton and Edwards. After all, it's not their fault that Obama has more experience as an elected official than either of them.
Lay it down for me brother. What'cha got?

What about starting with the Wikipedia entry on him...?

Read the last para of the "Early life and career" section; the "State legislature" section; the "Senate career" sections on the 109th Congress and 110th Congress; and you might add the "Books" section.
CRAP? Ohhh...alright.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:29 pm
Amigo wrote:
WHO IS OBAMA?


Some dude who's momma is allegedly from Wichita.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 12:41 am
Quote:
News from
THE MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jason Moon
517-371-5410
December 10, 2007

MDP Releases Voter Guide To Help Voters Understand Presidential Primary

LANSING - Today the Michigan Democratic Party released a voter guide to help voters understand the January 15, 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary.

"We want every eligible Democratic voter in Michigan to vote in the January 15, 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary," said MDP Chair Mark Brewer. "This guide gives voters the details of the Primary and all of their voting rights so that every Michigan Democrat can participate in helping choose the 2008 Democratic presidential candidate. The guide is available on our website and we encourage voters to circulate it."

Read the guide on the Internet here>
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Voter Guide On The January 15, 2008
Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary

1. Voters will vote at their regular polling places between 7 A.M. and 8 P.M.

2. Voters can vote by absentee ballot if they meet one of the requirements - out of town, age 60 or older, disability, etc.

3. The deadline to register to vote is 30 days before January 15, 2008 or December 17, 2007.

4. In order to vote at a polling place, a voter must show a photo ID or sign a statement that they do not have a photo ID with them. Absentee voters do not have to produce a photo ID.

5. Voters will be asked whether they want a Democratic or Republican ballot, and a record will be made of which ballot they take.

6. The voter's choice of candidate will be secret as in all public elections.

7. The Democratic ballot will have 6 choices:
Hillary Clinton
Christopher Dodd
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich
Uncommitted
Write-in

8. A vote for "uncommitted" is a vote to send delegates to the Democratic National Convention who are not committed or pledged to any candidate. Those delegates can vote for any candidate they choose at the Convention.

9. Supporters of Joe Biden, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson are urged to vote "uncommitted" instead of writing in their candidates' names because write-in votes for those candidates will not be counted.



http://www.michigandems.com/121007prs.html
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 01:19 am
New Hampshire's 22 delegate count by itself is not worth the time devoted to this battle, but I think this is worth it for the big picture...NH is small enough that an accuracy test of the voting machines will not be costly and will hopefully settle grumblings about various allegations regarding the vote counting process before Super Duper Tuesday.

I'm glad Kucinich stepped forward. Some of the Obama supporters were getting rather hysterical over the descrepancies between polls, votes and recounts.

At a time when elections in several other countries are being violently contested, and causing people to doubt the legitimacy of the process Kucinich has taken an important step to guarantee that the election process in our own country maintains the standard for fairness and accuracy that we demand other nations to follow.

Were another candidate to do this, it might be seen as a cheap shot by whiners and would probably cost that candidate votes in future contests. But for Kucinich to do this with such low polling numbers and nothing to gain by it shows that he is an honorable person and deserves our thanks for taken this on.

I may even donate $5 to Kucinich's campaign website as a way to help him pay for it.

Quote:


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hI6F-VhnmJPDIgAFnfu6VPHpqapAD8U3EBKG0
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 02:54 am
Interesting BFN. Is there a special fund link somewhere? I'll kick in $5 as well. I expect no changes... but an occasional spot check can only serve to keep um honest.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 03:03 am
Haven't seen anything on it yet. You can always go to Kucinich's page. I'm waiting to see how much it costs him.

It would be really big of both parties for their national organizations to split the costs and even bigger for the FEC to refund Kucinich.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 03:18 am
Butrflynet wrote:
Haven't seen anything on it yet. You can always go to Kucinich's page. I'm waiting to see how much it costs him.

It would be really big of both parties for their national organizations to split the costs and even bigger for the FEC to refund Kucinich.
Seems to me; Obama could have it for the $2,000 Dennis already spent. Pity the negative spin would cost him more.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 04:18 am
Bill, what do you think of this (scary, to me) scenario:
Edwards makes a disappointing show in SC and chooses to drop out of the race. Because his former running mate Kerry snubbed him for Obama, he influences his followers to swing their votes to Clinton.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 04:56 am
snood wrote:
Bill, what do you think of this (scary, to me) scenario:
Edwards makes a disappointing show in SC and chooses to drop out of the race. Because his former running mate Kerry snubbed him for Obama, he influences his followers to swing their votes to Clinton.
I don't think Kerry's faithful will do a lot of damage, even if all 15 of them vote for Obama. If Edwards has any influence worth peddling; he'd hang on to do it for a brokered convention (like Joefromchicago suggested). Personally; I think Hillary is polarizing enough that the vast majority of Edwards following already knows who their second choice is. I see no reason they'd be loyal to a two-time loser who, in all likelihood, would be forfeiting his chance at even the VP spot.

Further; after sticking his head up Obama's a$$ last Saturday night; he'd look like the world's biggest hypocrite from that day forward (neither donkey's nor elephants ever forget that kind of stuff).

Not too scary, IMO.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 06:20 am
Amigo wrote:
nimh wrote:
What about starting with the Wikipedia entry on him...?

Read the last para of the "Early life and career" section; the "State legislature" section; the "Senate career" sections on the 109th Congress and 110th Congress; and you might add the "Books" section.

CRAP? Ohhh...alright.

What's crap about it? Seems like a factual overview of all the things he's done to me. You got the info on the work he did before he was a politician; you got the things he did as state legislator; you got the legislative initiatives he pushed for in the Senate, his successes as well as failures, the positions he's taken, etc.

Who is Obama? The info is right there.. just one click away.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 10:05 am
Amigo wrote:
Lay it down for me brother. What'cha got?

These words. They look like English, yet they mean nothing to me.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 11:39 am
link
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 01:47 pm
Following the Iowa caucuses, while people were talking of an Obama electoral tsunami, I kept insisting that Iowa had been a tie and nothing had changed. After all, the delegates awarded were 15 for Clinton, 16 for Obama, and 14 for Edwards. Now the media is falling over themselves to gush about Clinton's "amazing" win in New Hampshire, but again, it was a tie. The delegates awarded were 9 for Clinton, 9 for Obama, and 4 for Edwards, making the totals awarded 24, 25, and 18. Once you add in the superdelegates that aren't awarded by actual voting, the results are:

Clinton 183
Obama 78
Edwards 52
Richardson 19
Kucinich 1

That's more of a lead, but with the magic number being 2025, it really isn't much. Especially given that 1688 delegates are up for grabs on February 5. The news media has a lot of hours to fill so they will have talking heads babbling breathlessly about momentum and whatnot, but the actual results so far are a tie for first between Obama and Clinton with Edwards a respectable second and 48 states left to vote. If the roughly 35-35-20 split persists, then nobody reaches the convention with enough delegates to win on the first ballot and Edwards' delegate bloc is the swing vote. And he's announced he'll stay in until the convention.
http://www.apostropher.com/blog/archives/004052.html
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 01:49 pm
blueflame1 wrote:
Civil Rights Tone Prompts Talk of an Endorsement
Susan Etheridge for The New York Times

Quote:



Yeah! that's the reason. Laughing
0 Replies
 
teenyboone
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 02:01 pm
Butrflynet wrote:
New Hampshire's 22 delegate count by itself is not worth the time devoted to this battle, but I think this is worth it for the big picture...NH is small enough that an accuracy test of the voting machines will not be costly and will hopefully settle grumblings about various allegations regarding the vote counting process before Super Duper Tuesday.

I'm glad Kucinich stepped forward. Some of the Obama supporters were getting rather hysterical over the descrepancies between polls, votes and recounts.

At a time when elections in several other countries are being violently contested, and causing people to doubt the legitimacy of the process Kucinich has taken an important step to guarantee that the election process in our own country maintains the standard for fairness and accuracy that we demand other nations to follow.

Were another candidate to do this, it might be seen as a cheap shot by whiners and would probably cost that candidate votes in future contests. But for Kucinich to do this with such low polling numbers and nothing to gain by it shows that he is an honorable person and deserves our thanks for taken this on.

I may even donate $5 to Kucinich's campaign website as a way to help him pay for it.

Quote:


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hI6F-VhnmJPDIgAFnfu6VPHpqapAD8U
3EBKG0


I do agree and would be willing to do the same! He IS an honorable man, with nothing to gain and I wished that he had been given more air time, instead of the media, "choosing" for us in advance! Love your posts.
Cool Cool Cool
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 03:18 pm
yes indeed, now the Clintons are racists all of a sudden. What a laugh....
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  1  
Fri 11 Jan, 2008 03:25 pm
Got news for you Bear. In just 24 wild hours, "Brother" Bill did manage to squander alot of personal support and I'm afraid that if his club card has not already been revoked for that 'fairy tale' comment amongst others, it soon will be.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 340
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.31 seconds on 06/20/2025 at 07:32:45