sozobe
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 04:03 pm
realjohnboy wrote:
sozobe wrote:
...hopefully put an end to the damnably long primary season. Don't think it'll happen, but hopefully mid-May or so... hopefully hopefully hopefully.


Amusingly, Soz, I was in Chicago for our A2K gethering. On the day we met. for fish and chips, the CIA guy resigned. When we met in Boston, something else of note on the national scene happened. I can't recall what.

The PA primary is a week from tomorrow. If Clinton wins by less then 5%....
We'll be in Alburquerque 5/14-5/19 or so.


I missed this... May 14th-19th, eh? That'd be delovely. :-)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 04:35 pm
georgeob1 wrote:
Either way we still have nearly seven months to go until the general election, and, no matter how the primaries develop, the pols and the press will fill all the available time with the invective, sound & fury, endless analysis of ever more trivial points, and all the rest of this tiresome recipe that has already so wearied us.

Oh god yes.. enough to drive ya to desperation. Wish I wasnt a political junkie, so I could just ignore it all...
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 04:42 pm
Butrflynet wrote:
Here is the text of Obama's speech today at the Alliance for American Manufacturing:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/gGBpbT

Great speech. My interest flagged a bit reading the second half, but I loved the first half. Glad to see him take a populist, combative tone.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 05:29 pm
Butrflynet wrote:



Meanwhile, here's something for all you football fans...


Political endorsements from newspapers, entertainers of all stripes, and now a football team owner probably mean very little.
But a couple of thoughts about Dan Rooney and his NFL team.
The Pittsburgh Steelers have an almost cult-like following amongst the blue-collar folks in PA and beyond. They seem to hate the eliteists from Philly or NY.
They play gritty football in a gritty town. They don't have scantily clad cheerleaders. They have no cheerleaders. The game is about the game.
When Rooney travels with the team, he sits in the back row of the airplane, as did their new coaching staff.
Some of their players have been/are very good. But their attitude seems to be that they will pay x-million to a guy. If he wants to jump to another team for 2x-million, fine. Some players have understood the notion of loyalty, and that is appreciated by the fans.
An endorsement of Obama from Dan Rooney may not count for much, but now at least yall know a bit more than you knew before.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 06:31 pm
link
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 06:45 pm
Oh, fer Chrissakes... Rolling Eyes

(not you, blueflame -- Lieberman.)
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 06:51 pm
Union audience boos as Clinton criticizes Obama by Muriel Kane and Dave Edwards
Published: Monday April 14, 2008

"I understand my opponent came this morning and spent a lot of his time attacking me," Hillary Clinton suggested to a union gathering of steelworkers in Pittsburgh on Monday.

As she went on to say, "Well, you know, I know that many of you, like me, were disappointed by recent remarks that he made," scattered boos and calls of "No" could clearly be heard from the audience.

"I think it's important that, you know, we give people the chance to really compare and contrast us," Clinton concluded.

This video is from CNN.com, broadcast April 14, 2008.
link
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 06:51 pm
Why it cost so much energy and borrowed credicard money topick up a candidate to wreck the tranqulity of the world?

Why not Americans lean to conduct their election without this fanfare?
Is DEMOCRACY A CORPORATE CONTROLLED system?
Oh
Obama
Dalai lama
I am
Rama
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 07:19 pm
Marc Ambinder notes:

"From friends at CBS News, here's a recorded telephone call from the mayor of York, PA, John Brenner, defending Sen. Barack Obama's comments":

    "Barack Obama understands us. He's got it right, we are frustrated -- frustrated with polices that enable businesses to leave our community, pensions to be stripped, health care benefits to be taken away and homes foreclosed. Unlike his opponents, who have been part of the Washington establishment that are out of touch with us, Barack Obama will change Washington. It is policies that hurt us. He will take on the special interests and fight for us."
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 07:45 pm
They are expecting Dems to listen to Lieberman?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 07:48 pm
Newspapers in mid-sized Pennsylvania towns endorse Obama - Part I

The Allentown Morning Call: Obama's vision is reason to nominate him
(April 13, 2008)

Quote:
Pennsylvania's Democratic voters on April 22 will choose between two candidates in the presidential primary. Both are qualified to become the nation's chief executive. They have more similarities than differences. But, The Morning Call recommends that Sen. Barack Obama be nominated, and we offer three reasons.

The first is the quality of his campaign. It has surprised the experts by moving him close to the finish line against bigger, more established political machines and it has communicated his basic ideas well. The second is his message of hope and change. It conveys a vision of the nation's future that is in tune with the tenor and consensus of most Americans. And third, and most important for the Democratic Party at this moment in history, there is Sen. Obama's ability to inspire.

The other Democratic candidate on the ballot here, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, has focused their criticism on Sen. Obama's relatively short resume. But there is nothing naive or amateurish about the campaign he has assembled. [..]

[H]e has done a good job of building a Pennsylvania organization. It has had to climb a steep hill, given that Sen. Clinton has the biggest share of high-profile Democratic officials' endorsements. Using the Internet, e-mail and old-fashioned storefront headquarters, he continues to build a corps of supporters here. And, at least so far, his has done a better job than the Clinton campaign of keeping the campaign positive.

In fact, while both candidates are members of the same U.S. Senate, Sen. Obama is the one who has distinguished himself as the better agent for changing Washington. Remember, on the issues, the differences between the Obama and Clinton platforms are thin or non-existent. He has set himself apart by enunciating a vision of a different America, one that people recognize as resting on the nation's founding principles. [..]

Sen. Obama offers that vision to a nation that, like President Lincoln's, is divided. [..] Republican and Democrat, young and old, conservative and liberal have much to fight about and are at each other's throats with little provocation. Finding common ground is the key, and Sen. Obama is better able to do that than Sen. Clinton. She has become a polarizing figure, an image that stems in part from the bitter partisanship of Washington during President Bill Clinton's administration. It was not for nothing that the journalist James B. Stewart called his book about the politics of those years ''Blood Sport.'' That rancor was not primarily Hillary Clinton's fault, but it is real, it persists, and her campaign so far has not dealt effectively with quelling it. [..]

Sen. Clinton has made much of her ''ability to lead'' on day one in the Oval Office. Past experience like hers is one thing, but leadership also depends on having a vision, plans to pursue that vision, and an ability to inspire others to follow. On those grounds, Sen. Barack Obama is well-suited to lead, and The Morning Call recommends his nomination in the Democratic primary.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 07:53 pm
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 08:28 pm
I picked up this flashback from the comments section on a Huffpost article.

http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2006/10/19/an-hour-with-illinois-senator-barack-obama

Really interesting.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 09:44 pm
nimh wrote:
Marc Ambinder notes:

"From friends at CBS News, here's a recorded telephone call from the mayor of York, PA, John Brenner, defending Sen. Barack Obama's comments":

    "Barack Obama understands us. He's got it right, we are frustrated -- frustrated with polices that enable businesses to leave our community, pensions to be stripped, health care benefits to be taken away and homes foreclosed. Unlike his opponents, who have been part of the Washington establishment that are out of touch with us, Barack Obama will change Washington. It is policies that hurt us. He will take on the special interests and fight for us."


Dems want to tax everything that moves and assume that businesses and business owners are endless buckets of money.

This mayor wants to change the rules that allow businesses to leave his community, eh?

What's he going to do, force them to stay in town? Force them to fund pensions and benefits they can no longer afford because of oppressive regulation and taxation?

If Dems want businesses to provide benefits and pensions, how 'bout repealing some of the burdensome regulation and taxation that force them to choose between staying in town and staying in business?
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Mon 14 Apr, 2008 11:10 pm
nimh wrote:
Umm... actually, what Tico wrote was "You are a sub-genus." Of diffuse classification, I would guess.


Good eye, nimh.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 15 Apr, 2008 12:29 am
nimh wrote:
Umm... actually, what Tico wrote was "You are a sub-genus."


No **** nimh. But I assumed it was a typo as it makes no sense as an intended insult.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Tue 15 Apr, 2008 12:29 am
blueflame1 wrote:
okie, one thing Rev. Wright understands is solutions. Obama's church has been active solution wise at a grassroots level. Hopefully that understanding and activism will be operating out of the Oval House come January.

About all he seems to understand is foaming at the mouth rants at rich white people, jews,and evil America.

His latest wild screaming rant was aimed at Hannity, etc. at a funeral of all places!
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 15 Apr, 2008 12:33 am
Dog whistle


We've been saying all along that Barack Obama's candidacy is going to bring out the ugliest face of the Republican Party before long.

But today's Republicans know that they can't engage in the open race-baiting of the Strom Thurmond era without endangering their party's image as "inclusive" -- an image intended not so much to appeal to minorities but to moderate voters repelled by overt racism. So they talk in a lot of code about "preserving white culture" and other well-worn tropes, often hinting and nudging at the old race-baiting vocabulary (such as the time Karl Rove talked about that "trash-talking" and "lazy" Obama fellow).

It's called "dog whistle politics," and Republicans -- including John McCain -- are its past and present masters.

So it's kind of funny that everyone's pretending that the most noteworthy recent example of it -- from Rep. Geoff Davis, a Republican from Kentucky -- is no big deal (at least, so far, it seems to be getting a pass from the media). Davis told an audience at a Republican fund-raiser:

"I'm going to tell you something: That boy's finger does not need to be on the button," Davis said. "He could not make a decision in that simulation that related to a nuclear threat to this country."

Wheeeewit!! Here boy!! C'mere an' get some good ole red meat! And of course [shpittoo], nobody hearing someone call a grown black man "boy" would have any cause to think it meant anything racist, right? [Wink nudge wink]

Davis himself was quick to disclaim that there was any subtext intended:

But Davis campaign spokesman said Davis misspoke and was not directing a racist statement at Obama but instead calling into question his qualifications for office.

"He simply misspoke," said Jeremy Hughes, Davis' campaign spokesman.

This is, to put it kindly, unadulterated horseshit. We all know that Davis was giving voice to a certain set of racial attitudes, and that he did it as part of a talk before a banquet audience indicates it was clearly intentional. And no one but the most blinkered and gullible Republican (though there are plenty of those, it's true) should be willing to buy it.

It will be telling, I think, to watch how the media handle it. If we're supposed to take Davis' glib manure-spreading at face value, it will speak volumes about a Fourth Estate that makes a fetish out of ostensibly offensive remarks by a black pastor for weeks on end but can't find the time to consider how Republicans are talking about one of the two remaining Democratic candidates for the presidency.

That's especially now the case that Davis has apologized. But note how he does so:

On Saturday night I gave a speech in which I used a poor choice of words when discussing the national security policy positions of the Presidential candidates. I was quoted as saying "That boy's finger does not need to be on the button."

My poor choice of words is regrettable and was in no way meant to impugn you or your integrity. I offer my sincere apology to you and ask for your forgiveness.

Though we may disagree on many issues, I know that we share the goal of a prosperous, secure future for our nation. My comment has detracted from the dialogue that we should all be having on legitimate policy differences and in no way reflects the personal and professional respect I have for you.

That's all swell and wonderful, but Davis never apologizes for what was most egregiously offensive about the remark -- that it referred to Obama the way an old Confederate slaveholder would refer to his holdings, the way old segregationists referred to civil-rights workers. It wasn't simply that it was offensive, it was that it was classic race-baiting.

And of course, Davis' defenders have been quick to proclaim him free of racist taint. Already, we can see how it's going to go:

Campbell County Democratic Party Chairman Ken Mullikin said he could "not believe" Davis would make such a comment.

"When you get somebody in an emotionally charged situation they speak what is on their mind," Mullikin said. "That comment clearly shows what Geoff Davis really believes about African-Americans."

But Northern Kentucky Republicans strongly disagree that Davis is a racist. They said it is Obama who has slammed small town America and working class people with his recent comments that those voters are "bitter" and clinging to guns and religion.

"Geoff Davis is absolutely not a racist," said Fourth District GOP Chairman Kevin Sell of Alexandria, who attended Saturday's dinner but said this morning he does not recall Davis' use of the word "boy" to describe Obama.

"I've known this man since 2001, and have campaigned with him," Sell said. "This is a man of integrity. All he was doing in that speech was questioning the experience of a candidate and the defense of our country. There was no question about that."

That's right: that whistle you heard may have brought every dog in town to my yard, but really, you didn't hear anything.

And besides, it's those Democrats who are the racists, dontcha know?
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 15 Apr, 2008 12:46 am
from tpm


You Bitter?

I've gotten asked by a lot of readers what I make of this whole "bitter" controversy. So a few thoughts.

In cases such as this I think it is always crucial to distinguish in our own minds between what we find offensive and what we've been conditioned to believe that others will find offensive. And perhaps even more importantly, what others will be able to twist and distort into something that other people will find offensive.

Each of those categories is important. But I find the exercise marvelously clarifying in thinking about how to understand these blow-ups when they happen.

In this case, I didn't think what he said was offensive. Of course, I don't live in a small town or in rural America. But then again, neither do any of the other people I've heard sound off on this topic. So I'm in good company. (This has been one of the more comedic aspects of this 72 hours -- watching a cavalcade of extremely wealthy pundits, editorialists and political operatives from New York and Washington tell me how rural Americans won't stand for this.) My understanding is that Obama was answering a question from someone who planned to go canvass for him in Pennsylvania and what they should expect since it's portrayed as being unfriendly ground for him. And what I understood him to be saying is that years of economic abandonment have left many communities in middle America even more reliant on community, tradition, their religion, etc. -- and from a political standpoint very protective of it.

I think he said much the same thing in this interview from 2004 which I published over the weekend. He said it more artfully, probably less apt to being spun out of control in a campaign echo-chamber.

So, with the obligatory, yes, he could have worded it better, do I think it was offensive and condescending? No. I don't. Do I think it can be spun into something offensive and condescending? Sure. That was obvious right off the bat. And how effective will it be against him or damaging to him? I'm not certain. From recent, bitter experience we all know of many instances where someone has been badly damaged politically for remarks which while inoffensive or explainable in themselves, nonetheless get spun and eventually received in a damaging way. So in a very real way, what's 'fair' in these cases is beside the point.

I'm skeptical that this will be as damaging to Obama as a lot of people seem to think. But who knows? We'll know in a few days.

What I do know is that this basic thought, often expressed in much less charitable ways, is commonplace in Democratic policy and political circles. And I have little doubt they've been expressed many times by both of the Clintons and her advisors. So speaking for myself I've spent too much time over, what, 15 years now? ... defending both Clintons from similarly ginned up nonsense to have much energy left to help out as they pull the same puffed up outrage act against another Democrat. I guess I'm just not feeling it.

With the Wright business and now with this, the more nuanced version of the Clinton line has been that what 'we' think is not really the point. It's what Republicans will do with it in the fall. And that's a real concern that I definitely have. I won't deny it. I've never thought Obama was a perfect candidate. But as we get deeper into the primary calendar, increasingly so, this 'what the Republicans will do' line has become more of a simulacrum, or a license, if you will, to do what Republicans actually do do. That is to say, to grab for political advantage by peddling stereotypes about Democrats and liberals that are really no less offensive than the ones we're talking about about Americans from small town and rural America.

And seeing Hillary go on about how Obama has contempt for folks in small town America, how he's elitist, well ... no, it's not because I think she's either. I never have. But after seeing her hit unfairly with just the same stuff for years, it just encapsulates the last three-plus months of her campaign which I can only describe as a furious descent into nonsense and self-parody. Part of it makes me want to cry. But at this point all I can really do is laugh.

--Josh Marshall
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 15 Apr, 2008 04:12 am
Roxxxanne wrote:
nimh wrote:
Umm... actually, what Tico wrote was "You are a sub-genus."


No **** nimh. But I assumed it was a typo as it makes no sense as an intended insult.


I thought it was quite clever...
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 757
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 11/13/2024 at 10:18:55