Hillary In Harlem. Obama In The Mud.

Three shameful items concerning Barack Obama on this last Sunday of October.

(1) Barack Obama and his supporters are trying to bamboozle themselves and American voters into thinking the gay-bashing tour of South Carolina will have no consequences and they have already ‘turned the page’ on this obnoxious homophobia tour. It turns out that Bob Farmer, a member of Obama’s national finance committee, whom we referred to yesterday when he left the Obama campaign to join Hillary — is gay. Although Farmer has not confirmed that the gay bashing tour is why he left, we will not be surprised if this starts a trend. Farmer will not be the first gay or gay positive person to leave the Obama campaign because of the gay bashing tour. Now that Farmer has left the Obama campaign, the Obama campaign is sliming Farmer.

(2) Today is the day when gay basher Donnie McClurkin sings for Barack Obama on Obama’s gay bashing tour.

(3) Today is also the day an Obama interview appears in the New York Times. We will discuss this filth tomorrow.

Before plunging, tomorrow, into the depths of Obama’s dishonesty and delusions let’s enjoy the last day of this Hillary birthday weekend.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, whose quest to become the first woman president is outpacing Barack Obama’s bid to become the first African-American winner, took her campaign to the nation’s best-known black neighborhood, and was hosted there by the nation’s most powerful black politician.

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-Harlem) introduced the New York senator to a nearly full audience at the historic Abyssinian Baptist Church shortly after noon, telling people sitting in the pews to turn to their neighbor and say, “We are making history.”

Hillary appeals to the Democratic Party base of voters. Hillary will bring out Women and African-Americans to vote for her in record numbers.

Clinton – who was also introduced by former president Bill Clinton, who retains near rock-star status in the black community – appears to be accomplishing that. She has done so largely by offering herself as a champion of women, another group that has struggled to advance in a world dominated by white men.

Drawing repeated cheers, Clinton promised that an America under her presidency would restore its image abroad by ending the Bush-Cheney “cowboy diplomacy.”

She said she would address the problems of “everyday Americans” by pushing for universal health care, affordable housing, rebuilding aging roads and bridges and creating a new GI Bill to help soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Hillary’s Harlem Homecoming was especially Historic. Charles Rangel is now the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, arguably the most powerful House committee. The last African-American to lead the House Ways and Means Committee was Adam Clayton Powell of Abyssinian Baptist Church, the host facility for Hillary’s Harlem Homecoming.

Abyssinian Baptist was once led by legendary preacher Adam Clayton Powell Jr., a proponent of black political power who launched his own congressional career from the pulpit. Powell later was among the first Protestant preachers to endorse the presidential bid of John F. Kennedy, who had to overcome religious bias against his Catholic faith.

Abyssinians’s current pastor, the Rev. Calvin Butts, reminded the audience of the church’s traditional political activism, and said Clinton’s candidacy would also break new ground.

“Adam always understood who would become the next president, and all of us here understand who will be the next president, isn’t that right?” Butts said, drawing a roar.

A CNN poll last week showed Clinton with a 24-point lead over Obama among registered black Democrats.

African-American women are especially strong in that 24 point lead for Hillary over Obama.

“I think there is a sisterhood that transcends race,” Dorise Roberts Black, a black Harlem resident and retired principal, said as she entered the church. [snip]

Black women provide the former first lady with her biggest support from among black voters, choosing her as their top choice almost three times as often as they cite Obama.

Willie Mae Anderson said she would likely back Clinton even though she is sympathetic to Obama’s goals.

“I’m a black woman, we have a good African-American candidate running, and I love him,” she said. “But she has experience and she can win. Look at what Bush has done to us. I think our world depends on her.”

Anecdotal evidence, on the street interviews in Harlem, demonstrate Hillary’s strong support with African-Americans.

America’s most famous black community is spurning African-American presidential candidate Barack Obama and backing Hillary Rodham Clinton instead.

More than half of the 96 people questioned by a Post reporter in Harlem this week said they would vote for Clinton, with most preferring her experience as senator and first lady over relative neophyte Obama.

“Obama has complexion protection, but skin color doesn’t cut it. Anywhere uptown, you need to earn respect, and Obama hasn’t proven that he’s done anything for the minority community,” said college student Camille Garreude, 20.

Fifty-seven percent chose Clinton; 19 percent favored Obama.

Clinton was not surprisingly a favorite among females, with 75 percent in her corner.

We wrote on August 22, 2007 We Can’t Spare This General. She Fights. The premise of that article was that Hillary is a fighter and we need her to fight for us. Willie Mae Anderson of Abyssinian Baptist Church said the same thing in less words:

Look at what Bush has done to us. I think our world depends on her.”

Share

60 thoughts on “Hillary In Harlem. Obama In The Mud.

  1. “I think our world depends on her.”

    For certain! I don’t have a problem defending her to the hilt. Obama and his cult are becoming more and more loathsome by the day. The insidiousness of their attacks are becoming more reckless and violent in their intent to prevail.

    Playing follow the leader is their game as they become more and more virulent by the day. Their rock star is nothing more than a media creation. They fear and with good reason, Obama is collapsing under the weight of his own fraudulency, as an ’empty suit’ contender for the presidency. Obama’s been caught with his pants down playing way out of his league.

    Mrs. S.

  2. “I think our world depends on her.”

    I was struck with that same quote, Mrs. Smith, and I believe it wholeheartedly. I’ve said it before. We have much work to do in our society on issues involving diversity but it will take a real leader, like Hillary Clinton, to lead us. Obama is not up to the tasks. Hillary understands the complexity and history of our problems in the U.S. and she truly knows how to bring people together. She’s doin’ it. –mollyj

  3. First, forgive me please for any wrong spelling, I hope I can get away with the excuse of saying I’ve been celebrating Hillarys birthday, with one drink……ok maybe 3…or….anyway, Happy 60th girl!! Hehe 🙂

    Second: I was really offended by Obamas ridiculous statement in this NYtimes article saying:“I don’t think anybody would claim that Senator Clinton is going to inspire a horde of new voters,” aaaahh……ever heard of this counter male gender called WOMEN!!!!!! What a moron! Women is said to be 53% of the GE electorate! Oy! And the AA community is said to be about 10%, so I’ll say Hillary would bring out more NEW voters, and lets not forget about black women! A majority of AA women (excluding oprah) supports her!

    And I would just like to past in a part of an article a read a few days ago, it really summed up/described exactly what I thought about Obama and his campaign. : From the washingtonpost.
    tinyurl.com/ywoutl

    “But Chynoweth adds: “There’s a risk — partly because he’s always surrounded by Secret Service guys — that some people feel that Obama might think of himself as too cool for school.” But Secret Service protection, which Clinton also gets, is only part of Obama’s problem. The large crowds Obama draws hinder his ability to engage in traditional campaigning. “People here don’t just expect you to be on the stage,” Chynoweth said. “They expect you to be out in the audience among the people.”

    Obama’s charisma causes him other problems. Arnesen said that while Clinton’s message “is very much about the voters,” Obama’s is “very much about himself” and his personal capacity to create change.”

    Barack “ me me me me me” Obama goes on the attack in the NY times article, and while he says he won’t go against his earlier promise of being nice and bring about a ‘new’ kind of politics (by not attacking), it really don’t matter at this point what he says.
    I think the media has figured out that it won’t help no matter how much they try, to help him bring down Hillary. And as we know, the media likes to show their muscular powers, and they need someone to fall though the cracks. So they will bring down Obama, is my prediction! At least this evening! God knows how I’ll feel in the morning, 🙂

    And at this point, even a minor attack from Obambi at this point will be reported by the media as a major outlash!! Or at least I hope! Them we will see Obama cry wolf! If the past history of the MSM can be counted on, I actually think this is what will happen. Remember Bill Clinton said early on in the campaign, ‘someone will fizzle, someone always does’!! And it wasn’t Hillary!!!!!! Yay!

    PS. So sorry people for the loooong post, I was just watching what my fingers typed 🙂

  4. ps. how can I get something in my post to show up in bold letters, I’ve tried copying, and also use the command of Crtl B, but no show!
    And I see others been able to do so, I wanna do it toooo!!!!

    🙂 😉

  5. Obama’s new ad is supposed to be a hard hitting attack on Hillary?! The thing that really gets me about this guy is how dastardly he is, just like Uriah Heap. He said some really nasty, mean, and downright dishonest things about Hillary in his New York Times interview, but he says nothing on camera. The similiarities to the Bush people are striking, what with all the behind the back attacks the Obama people make and say one thing do the complete opposite.

    Speaking of Social Security, here is a clip of Obama talking about how “everything is on the table.” Obama needs to study his recent history a little bit, and stop repeating the republican propaganda about Reagan’s greatness.

  6. aNewNEWDEAL you make a good point!

    The way Obama can speak more freely with papers, but not in front of cameras. I know a lot of people would think his career or at least his Presidential chances where over, had there been a video tape of Obama saying: “Let me scratch that” with regards to the use or none use of nuclear bombs.

    A coward, nothing but a coward!

  7. Gorto..

    Hi.. I can tell you howto.. but for more info you can google (html code) and it will give you the symbols and what they represent to design your post.

    This with a b in the middle and without this|| will give you emboldened lettering. At the end of the word or phrase you need the counterpart with the letter b after the slash to complete bold lettering.

    Yes, mollyj…have you noticed how vicious the Obamamaniacs are becoming?

    Mrs. S.

  8. Woops…(my greater than and lesser than signs) didn’t show up in my last post. I’ll try again …(). If you don’t see them, go to google.

    Mrs. S.

  9. Mrs. Smith…….thank you!! But I think I should do both you and I a favor, and re-read your post in the mornin’ 😀

    At this point, way too mind confusing. 😉

    I should also let everyone know that I currently live in Europe, so that you all don’t think I drink way too early in the evening.
    I’m off to bed, a nice evening to you all!

  10. What Hillary said
    October 28, 2007

    IN AN interview with The Boston Globe editorial board on Oct. 10, Senator Hillary Clinton made a remark that has been so badly twisted by her opponents that we feel it necessary to reprint the interview transcript that contains the remark.

    The quote that was lifted from the interview and magnified by Clinton’s opponents is this: “I have a million ideas. The country can’t afford them all.” Within hours of the Globe’s news report on Clinton’s visit, the Republican National Committee sent out an e-mail alert claiming the remark showed how expensive a Clinton presidency would be for the taxpayers. It launched a “Clinton Spend-o-meter” on its website, tracking the potential cost of Clinton’s campaign proposals.

    A week later at the Republican presidential debate in Orlando, Fla., Rudy Giuliani played the remark for laughs, quoting her and adding the zinger: “No kidding Hillary, America can’t afford you!”

    All in good fun, perhaps, until you learn that Clinton was saying she opposes big government spending, not the other way around.

    At the Globe meeting, Clinton was asked why she had turned cool on a proposal for so-called baby bonds that she has spoken favorably about just the week before. Baby bonds – sometimes called Individual Development Accounts – are small nest eggs government sets aside for each American child, which would build until adulthood when they could be used for college tuition or a down payment on a house. Though ridiculed when Clinton mentioned them, baby bonds have bipartisan support and can be an effective way to fight poverty. Clinton was asked whether dropping a good, new, bold idea like this was a symptom of what some critics have called a too-cautious campaign.

    Here is Clinton’s full answer: “Well, I have a lot of good, new, bold ideas, and I have to make some choices among them.” She explained that baby bonds didn’t have the level of political support of other proposals she had to help people pay for college. “I have a million ideas. I can’t do all of them. I happen to think in running a disciplined campaign – especially when it comes to fiscal responsibility, which is what I’m trying to do – everything I propose I have to pay for. You know, you go to my website, you’ll see what I would use to pay for what I’ve proposed. So I’ve got a lot of ideas, I just obviously can’t propose them all. I can’t afford them all. The country can’t afford them all.”

    Clinton has adopted a pay-as-you-go rule for new spending, much like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s rules for the Democratic Congress. In order to avoid ballooning the deficit, the pay-go rules require a funding source be attached to any new spending. The 60-cent hike in the cigarette tax that would have paid for the expansion of children’s healthcare is one example.

    What Americans really can’t afford are cheap political distortions.

  11. Edwards and his wife are the worst racist and sexist. Cant wait for these two losers to go back to their big mansion.

  12. “Privately, Obama aides say they believe Obama is a candidate of real, transformational change, and that uproars like the McClurkin controversy are necessary speed bumps on the road to bringing people with opposing viewpoints together to air their differences.”

    UPROARS ?

    NECESSARY SPEED BUMPS ?

    These folks are in serious denial. They act as if this stuff is happening TO them, instead of them being the cause of it.

  13. As for Hillary running in general election mode, it only makes sense for her to not to say anything in the primary that could come back to haunt her in the GE. That’s just common sense.

  14. I hear your frustration and even anger at the tactics of the male candidates — they certainly sound alike — both Republicans and Democrats. The view of BO’s supporters that if he just attacks her a bit more, her supporters will say, “Oh yeah…what was I thinking?…I’ll switch (back) to Obama” is foolish.

    I think that the anger will grow as BO and JE keep attacking and furnishing fodder to the Republicans.

    However, let’s keep our cool too. Let’s not demonize BO or JE. Let’s keep it to their tactics and statements. They are disappointing but not bad people compared to that insane group of warmongers on the other side.

  15. Edwards’ new stupidity…

    , N.H. (AP) – Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards says prescription drug companies should have to wait two years to begin advertising their new products to consumers.

    “With such aggressive and often misleading drug company marketing, it’s too easy for advertising – instead of doctors or proven results – to influence families’ health decisions,” Edwards said in excerpts of his speech provided to The Associated Press. “But the (Food and Drug Administration) has been an ineffective watchdog, reviewing only a small fraction of ads.

    Besides the two-year delay on new-drug advertising, he would require drug companies to get FDA approval before launching major ad campaigns. He also would increase penalties for companies that violate truth-in-advertising laws and would require companies to disclose more information about a drug’s side effects and effectiveness compared to placebos and alternative drugs.

  16. Y’all
    On pharmaceuticals: i was very impressed with Senator Clinton’s discussion of the category of drugs called biologics when she was discussing FDA policy. She was particularly talking about the costs of biologics. I was taken aback that a candidate even knew what a biologic was/is. I think that should be a question in the debate for all the candidates, as one who depends on this category of drug for quality of life. He’s outta his mind with this policy. And he would have a number of major professional groups and patient groups campaignin’ against him on this policy. He’s shown a very impractical side when it comes to what he would regulate. Remember JE sayin’ “I’ll ask people to sacrifice their SUV’s.” I was waitin’ for him to say I’ll ask people to sacrifice their masions with a carbon footprint the size of the state of Texas. And that’s the problem you get when you have people runnin’ with a certain sense of entitlement that seems to come through with both JE and BO.

    I won’t “demonize” them, but vilification is the very thing they are attemptin’ to do to Hillary. It doesn’t work because she already has established herself as a person to the voters. Actually, what I think J and E are doin’ is demonizin’ themselves with their ridiculous attacks.

    Is there a theme for this debate…does it have a focus on an issue or a set of issues or is it on any topic?

    –mollyj

  17. I wonder whether Senator Obama really admires Reagan the way he says he does.

    More likely this is a thinly veiled appeal to Reagan Democrats in Iowa, and to independent voters in New Hampshire.

    But if the admiration he professes is real, then he should read what Gerald Ford said about Reagan, before he gets too carried away . . .

  18. Obama supporters gloating over his gay controversay on mydd.

    McClurkin Wins Cheers at Obama Event .

    This is sickening…

    It’s very strange that we haven’t heard anything from a prominent gay friend of Obama and Clinton hater Andrew Suivillian(?) on this issue.

  19. This is good. Looks like Washingtonpost is getting sick and tired of Obama’s double talk on Iran. Tomorrow’s paper…
    Foreign Policy Grown-Up
    Where Clinton Stands Out Among the Democrats

    So now Barack Obama has come out swinging against Hillary Clinton. After months of gentlemanly restraint, he accuses her of poll-tested, triangulated dissembling. It’s true that Clinton has ducked questions on Social Security reform and abandoned her husband’s principled commitment to free trade. But the Obama attack deserves to fail. On the big foreign policy questions of the day, it is Obama who looks craven and Clinton who looks honest.

    Begin with the Iran debate. All the Democratic presidential hopefuls know that a nuclear Iran is scary. They know that the Europeans have been patiently negotiating with Iran to secure a freeze of its program and that the Iranians have been stalling. But Clinton is the only Democratic candidate who unequivocally embraces the obvious next step: Push hard for the sanctions that might change Iran’s calculations. Unlike all her opponents, Clinton supported a pro-sanctions resolution in the Senate. Ever since that vote, Obama and the rest have attacked her mercilessly.

    It’s not that Clinton’s rivals believe sanctions are mistaken. It’s that they lack the courage to defy Bush-hating primary voters, who think that lining up with the president on any issue is like becoming a Death Eater. “I learned a clear lesson from the lead-up to the Iraq war in 2002,” says base-pleasing John Edwards, “if you give this president an inch, he will take a mile — and launch a war.” “This is a lesson that I think Senator Clinton and others should have learned,” Obama echoes. “You can’t give this president a blank check and then act surprised when he cashes it.”

    The truth is that Clinton did not give Bush any sort of “blank check” — if Bush wants to bomb Iran or hit Iranian units inside Iraq, he can do so without a Senate resolution. But Obama and Edwards are so intent on Bush-bashing that they refuse to cut him any slack, even when he advances a policy that they might ordinarily favor. After the administration announced a new package of Iran sanctions on Thursday, Edwards declared that the president and his team had once again “rattled their sabers in their march toward military action.” Bush hatred has driven him to the point where he regards sanctions as a harbinger of war rather than an alternative.

    Clinton’s rivals are contemplating history and deriving only a narrow lesson about Bush: Don’t trust him when he confronts a Muslim country. But the larger, more durable lesson from Iraq is that wars can be caused by a lack of confrontation. The Iraq invasion happened partly because the world had lost the stomach to confront Saddam Hussein by other means. By 2002, the sanctions on Hussein’s regime had been diluted, and there was pressure to weaken them further. Hussein was no longer “in his box,” to use the language of the time: If you believed that a resurgent Saddam Hussein presented an intolerable threat, it was worth taking the risk of unseating him by force, sooner rather than later.

    Alone among the Democratic candidates, Clinton has the honesty to insist that the case for war was reasonable at the time — even if, with the benefit of hindsight, the invasion has proved disastrous. In sticking to that politically difficult position, Clinton is saying that, despite its awful risks, war can sometimes be the least bad choice. She is not running away from military power, even in a political climate that makes running attractive.

    Likewise on sanctions, Clinton is the only one to insist that sanctions are less a prelude to war than a means of forestalling it. They are more likely to work, moreover, if the military option is looming in the background, which is why bellicose comments from Bush or his vice president don’t prove that war is the preordained strategy. The idea that the threat of war can prevent actual war is the most basic lesson of nuclear doctrine, but it appears to escape the Bush haters. In a recent interview with NPR to military force but also acknowledges that Americans face real threats, that feckless foreign powers can sometimes make the ideal of multilateralism unattainable and that war can sometimes be the least bad option.

    Obama, who promised to rise above partisanship, seems too fearful of his party’s Bush-hating base to offer that vision. It’s impressive and surprising that Clinton, who railed against a vast right-wing conspiracy not so long ago, has risen above Bush hatred in forming her worldview. She has come a long way in just one decade

  20. Wasn’t Obama supposed to appear on stage with McClurkin tonight? I thought that was the plan and he wasn’t “backing down” but I’m reading now that Obama wasn’t even at the event – he just sent a video message.

    http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=7277679

    Typical of him to say he is not backing down and then not show up – trying to have it both ways, say one thing do another, and hope no one is paying attention.

  21. I love the LEAD STORY on HILLARYHUB today……”OBAMA ATTACKS HILLARY’s CHARACTER”

    That totally sums up what is going on. I was scratching my head, and worrying about how “our girl” would handle this. She is obviously much brighter than I….Because that PHOTO of OBAMA, all smug, with his arms folded, attacking her CHARACTER says it ALL. It sums up everything he is trying to do.

    POOR OBAMA, when will he ever learn that attacking HILLARY CLINTON’s character only reminds DEMOCRATS of the 90’s, and reminds them of how much they love the CLINTONS?????

    HILLARY CLINTON is a genius. OBAMA is a loser.

  22. I was at Abyssinian yesterday. It was thrilling and the crowd was just atomic. We spoke to reporters after and they were mainly interested in why black voters were supporting Clinton instead of O. I played nice, ‘I like O, maybe in the future. But Hillary is smarter and tougher. She kicked Newt Gingrich’s ass, she kicked Al D’Amato’s ass, she kicked Ken Starr’s ass.’

    As NY politcs go, it was like the Oscars. All the heavyhitters, Rangel, the Lt. Governor, City Council Speaker, State Assembly heavies, Teacher’s Union. Harlem pols can’t stand Rudy. He will use his police connections to try to suppress the black vote in 2008 and steal NY.

  23. I have to say the HILLARY HATE from the far left is getting UGLIER and UGLIER and UGLIER.

    I am taking a break from it all until Tuesday’s debate. I have complete confidence that HILLARY will hit a few home runs. And I am sure JOHN EDWARDS hair will look pretty too.

  24. Well . . . I read the WashPost article posted above, and I find it remarkable in two respects: i) first, they acknowledge that Clinton’s approach is realistic, and her opponent’s position is craven, ii) second, they acknowledge that there was a reasonable case to remove Saddam in 2002 and again in 2007, after Cohen et. al. called it a mistake and demanded an Edwards style apology.

    This is precisely what many of us have been saying on this website for months, the timing could not be better, and normally I would say that it is better that wisdom come late rather than not
    at all. But this is supposed to be a great newspaper, and they need to get it right sooner not later.

  25. Simply put, Hillary believes in diplomacy, and is astute enough to realize that effective diplomacy requires leverage. Without leverage, the adversary has no incentive to cooperate.

    In 2002, the leverage was military–if Saddam failed to comply with inspections. Unfortunately, Bush abused it.

    In 2007, the leverage is economic– to deny the IRG and KF the funding they need to pursue terrorism. The Webb bill prevents another abuse.

    Obama and Edwards are in Never Never Land on all this. As such, they lack the wisdom and courage to be President.

    2002 with Iraq, and in 2007 with Iran. But you cannot have effective diplomacy without leverage. The leverage in 2002 was contingent military, whereas in 2007 it is economic.

    Once again she has given leverage to the Administration to pursue diplomacy.

  26. I just finished watching Bill Mahers friday show up on youtube.
    And Andrew Sullivan was on the panel, I don’t really know much about him, but he was ANGRY with Hillary!! haha, and this guy is gay and voted for Bush in 2000, he is gay and said he is supporting Obama, he said this after Bill Maher brought up the subject of Obama bringing with him on this gospel tour a ‘cured’ gay guy.

    And he was angry that Obama and politicians in general pander to the religious people!!!!!!!!!!!!! I’m sorry….but what about the gay bash part???? Oh these gay republicans, I’ll never understand, never, how can you support someone who hates you for who you are??

  27. I reading a washingtonpost article about the news coverage of the candidates. Hillary gets the most media coverage with 17% followed by Obama 14% and Gouliani 9% …..

    But here is a section that cought my eye,which is something we all have been talking about and suspecting. While Obama himself have in the past been whining about receiving little coverage! Hillary has been receiving more negative than positive coverage, 37% negative and 27% positive.

    But check this part:

    Overall, though, the Democratic candidates drew more positive stories (35 percent) than the Republicans (26 percent). That, says the Washington-based research group — which conducted the study with Harvard’s Shorenstein Center — was almost entirely due to the friendly coverage accorded Obama (47 percent positive) and the heavily negative treatment of McCain (12 percent positive).

  28. I’m not surprise, most in the media is supporting Obama and you can tell by all the softball questions, anti-Hillary and Bill and just plain scare tactics in their writings.

    Oh yeah another thing, what most upset them is that Hillary doesn’t doesn’t kiss their asses, like faker Chris Matthew and Tim Russett…I’ve never met two closeted ripubs as these two. With CM shrill self going personal every time he talks about Hillary.

    And now we have Andrew Sullivan and his whinny self talking about calling Clinton another Bush/Cheney. I was so glad to see the other quests slam that down, hard.

  29. The good news tho, is that Obamas positive coverage is ending!

    The poll showed that while Obama was doing well in the polls, he got positive coverage, with constant repeats of calling him ‘rock star’ and so on…. now however, he is declining in polls, and his used to be positive coverage has now change to neutral coverage. Still not much in comparison to Hill, but we’re getting there.

    What I like about it is that Obama started to stall and decline in the polls because people saw he is a rookie and not ready. Not because Hillary went negative on him, all she had to do was put forth her case, and people are choosing her over him!!

    Obama wasn’t taken down, and can’t blame on that, all he can is blame himself, and I bet THAT must really hurt for a man of such a big ego as his!!! 🙂

  30. Laura Ingram was cheering on Obama on her show today and was asking him to go more negative on Hillary. They want Edwards and Obama to softer her up before the general.

  31. Carbynew, I see your point about Hillary not kissing the rings of the self-appointed media pundits, but it’s more comlicated than that.

    Hillary has to be careful about how many TV appearances she does. She can easily reach a stauration point that will turn off voters and increase the sense of inevitability which may in turn unnaturally raise expectations. Also, she has learned to dole out media appearances when launching new policy statements (i.e. health care). By being judicious in her apperances, she can either generate buzz or keep expectations lower than what would happen if she became the inevitable candidate by virtue of saturation.

    In a sense, that very thing has happened to Bwak. In the early months, he created a lot of buzz and would make appearances at the drop of the hat. In the end, his message and his lack of organizational control have caused him to falter in the polls, in the media and most importantly in debates with everyone watching. That has resulted in many of his supporters questioning his flash in the pan style and his lack of actual depth as a candidate. He has fallen to the two things Hillary is avoiding- saturation and unnaturally high expectations.

    Think about it. What are the chief complaints amongst Bwak supporters? His lack of charisma (it was severly hyped dating back to the ’04 DNC) and his lack of other supporters. Face it, when you are acnadidate, you have to get supporters to keep supporters otherwise you risk current supporters feeling like they’re out on a limb for someone and possibly backing a loser. It happened with Dean. Unnaturally high expectations, one moment of goofiness borne out of frustration and he becomes a whipping post for all other candidates. No one wants to back a loser. Folks still liked him. A lot. Many of them like that edginess and currently support candidates they think have it, but they don’t like losing and when push comes to shove, they will go where they think their vote will matter. With someone whose organization and message resonate as a winner.

    Hillary is a winner. That’s partly intelligence. It’s partly a final recognition of her warmth and humanity. It’s also party organization and discipline. Mostly though- it’s her ideas are sound and her methods judicious. After seven years of having Slim Pickens at the helm going off like a dumbass at every turn and on every conceivable front, voters are ready for someone with a plan, someone who will rescue them and not himself.

    Bwak’s advisers got this one wrong from the start. It’s the country stupid. Not an egotistical, triangulator of mythic proportions like we find in Bwak.

  32. ra1029 – I agree that’s what they want. Isn’t it interesting that none of those media people are asking Obama to put forth his proposals and then letting people decide if he’s the better candidate. The fact is they just enjoy hearing Hillary-bashing and BO and JE are falling for it.

    The other problem with Obama’s criticism is that he never seems to show up. He wasn’t there for the vote on Iraq, he didn’t show up for the next vote he disagreed with (what was it again?) because he was in NH, and then he vehemently disagreed with
    her Iran vote when he was in Iowa. His explanations of “I didn’t know when they were holding the vote” and “My vote wouldn’t have made a difference” are absolutely pathetic.

    There just doesn’t seem to be any authenticity there. What does he mean by the politics of hope, if he thinks the plan when he is behind is to “kneecap the frontrunner”? Why does he criticize Hillary for the vote he was for a few months ago? Why didn’t try to persuade his fellow anti-war Dems to vote against the Iran sanctions, and stay around to hear their views that this was NOT a license for war? Now that he has started attacking Hillary for her refusal to answer hypotheticals about Social Security, what are his solutions and what does he think the problem is?

    If I understand the Obama candidacy, it is that he will be his own Secretary of State and chat with problem leaders, he will not show up for important decisions, his first instincts are not well-seasoned, and he will justify those reactions by misstating others’ views.

    If that’s too harsh, blame it on the anger I feel at his parroting the Republican line and his supporters parroting his charge that Hillary is “Bush-Cheney lite”. That’s calumny. And slander. But I’ll listen to anyone who wants to explain where I’m wrong or misinformed.

  33. OkieAtty, it’s called over exposure. I knew Obama had let that happen when I saw the vibe magazine cover. It’s not that one cover would have been so bad, it’s that it was like his 5th such cover in a short period of time and he looked more like a spokesmodel than a candidate for president.

  34. BTW- Iowa is set for 1/3/08. It’ll be held at the same time as the GOP caucus. Also, there’s a good article in Thursday’s Baltimore Sun about how the caucus system is outdated and actually creates fewer primary voters. http://tinyurl.com/ywb9c8 Look at the attached study.

  35. I totally agree with everything you wrote, OkieAtty but I was just pointing out this since of entitlement pundits and the media have and how they have been consistently wrong about Hillary’s running of her campaign.

    It’s like she won’t play by their rules and they don’t understand why she is leading in the race the way she is with all the negatives they write about her…so now it’s personal with some of them.

    Hillary has been masterful over the media and has kept a discipline and focus campaign that has not got off message and fallen for the “rock star” treatment from the press.

    Hillary has been very masterful in awarding those who been fair with her with access and those who have not…well they got the message…nada.

  36. This is on dailykos’s frontage:

    No one could’ve seen this coming…

    The whole controversy might have been forgotten in the swell of gospel sound except Mr. McClurkin turned the final half hour of the three-hour concert into a revival meeting about the lightning rod he has become for the Obama campaign.

    He approached the subject gingerly at first. Then, just when the concert had seemed to reach its pitch and about to end, Mr. McClurkin returned to it with a full-blown plea: “Don’t call me a bigot or anti-gay when I have suffered the same feelings,” he cried.

    “God delivered me from homosexuality,” he added. He then told the audience to believe the Bible over the blogs: “God is the only way.” The crowd sang and clapped along in full support.
    Aravosis nails it:

    So, in the end, Obama let his “best” and “favorite” artist slam gays to thousands of African-Americans, in his name, and neither he nor his hand-chosen white gay preacher said anything in response. Class act, that Obama campaign. For them, creating a “dialogue” means the gay-basher gets to spread his bigotry to thousands while the candidate and the token gay STFU.
    It’s an all-out implosion by the Obama campaign. This truly is indefensible.

  37. The msm’s conspicuous bias in favor of Obama, and their anti-Hillary animus is an old story. It has been proven here so often as to become a cliche. Still, it is essential to call they on it every time it happens, and that is what this site does, brilliantly in my opinion.

    The newer story is how it takes msm so long to arrive at an accurate assessment of a situation, because they are captive to the narrative and to that biased in view point. In the meantime the public is misled by them. This has serious policy implications for our democracy, in the election process and beyond.

  38. hey guys, just checking in for today. the new university of iowa poll shows hillary leady by 29%, obama 27%, and edwards 20%. damn i don’t want edwards to tank to soon though.lol.

  39. Andrew Sullivan is a angry ,man….not unlike Obama! Whatever his choice is, I hope that for democracy’s sake that Sullivan can finally vote in the US!!!!

    On another note:

    I watched the presidential wives forum o C-SPAN with Maria Shiver hosting it. Michelle Obama, Elizabeth Edwards, Cindy McCain, Mrs. Romney and Jeri Thompson were present. Other spouses/wives were asked not could not attend due to scheduling problems.

    Quiet a few funny moments…..

    Michelle made some funny comments/gaffes but appeared genuine; she dislikes all this polling.

    Elizabeth tried to hog the initial time but later gave way to Cindy

    Mrs. Ronmey gave some long winded answers

    Cindy was a little low keyed

    Jeri Thompson appeared honest…saying she was a little new . Her best moment/funny moment was that having a supportive presidential spouse was important because we have seen how the presidents have aged while I office…..just of a babe’s mouth..!

    They all agreed that it is tough job on the campaign trail and nobody notices that women have to work harder.

    The big moment was when Maria mentioned that some male historian said nobody could understand how tough the job of a first lady is…with his comment that only a man in that position would understand it. So Bill’s name came up and all the others were silent.

    Hurray for Hillary…trying to take on double DOSE of the “tough jobs” in that White House for the betterment of the country.

  40. yeah, dcdemocrat there is a civil war going on daily kooks over this bigot. it’s ironic, obama is taking far more heat from this bigoted supporter than the rezko scandal. strange.

  41. Don’t panic over the Hawkeye Poll. You need to compare it
    with the previous Hawkeye Poll. I’ve provided some interesting
    point below.

    Democratic race tight among likely caucus-goers

    After trailing in earlier UI Hawkeye Polls, Clinton now leads among likely Democratic caucus-goers with 28.9 percent – a gain of 4.1 percent since August. Her lead is slim, only 2.3 points over Obama, who sits at 26.6 percent — a boost of 7.3 percent since August. Edwards has 20.0 percent, a 6 percent drop since August. Richardson’s August surge appears to have retreated, from 9.4 then percent to 7.2 percent now. Biden registered above 2 percent in the Hawkeye Poll for the first time, receiving 5.3 percent from likely caucus-goers. No other candidate reached 2 percent. A total of 8.9 percent are undecided, a decrease of more than 5.5 percent since March.

    Edwards, Clinton supporters more likely than Obama supporters to caucus

    Among Democrats, Edwards and Clinton supporters are significantly more likely than Obama supporters to say they are very likely to attend their caucus. Of Edwards supporters, 62.3 percent say they are “Very Likely” to caucus, as do 60.2 percent of Clinton supporters and 48.1 percent of Obama supporters. In 2004, 46.4 percent of Obama supporters did not caucus, compared to 42 percent of Clinton supporters and only 24.5 percent of Edwards supporters.

    “Obama is clearly relying heavily on those who do not caucus regularly,” Redlawsk said. “If we only look at caucus-goers who are almost certain to attend, we find that Edwards makes up the gap with Obama and Clinton moves clearly ahead. Women will be the key to a Clinton victory; for Obama, getting people who are less likely to caucus out the door in January will be critical.”

    Gender and age play big role

    Significant gender and age differences appear in support for the Democratic candidates. Clinton does well among women, as she has from the beginning. At the same time, her support among men is not nearly as strong. The result is a “gender gap” in October of nearly 11 points, as 33 percent of women and 22.5 percent of men support Clinton. The opposite is true for Edwards, who is much more heavily supported by men (25 percent of men, 16.8 percent of women). Obama, however, gathers equal support from both men (26.7 percent) and women (26.5 percent).

    Obama’s strongest supporters are younger. Looking at three age groups, Democratic caucus-goers under 45 are much more likely to support Obama than any other group. About 41 percent of this group supports Obama, compared to 19 percent for Clinton and 16 percent for Edwards. Among those older than 60, however, Clinton leads with 31 percent, Obama has 24 percent and Edwards has 17 percent support.

    “The gender and age patterns of support are particularly striking,” Redlawsk said. “It is not surprising that Clinton has stronger support among women, but the gender gap is quite large at 11 percent. And clearly Obama’s message of reaching across the aisle and working together, combined with the rhetoric of hope he employs, resonates especially with younger caucus-goers. However, for Obama, the real risk is that these folks will not show up to caucus, since historically caucus-goers have been significantly older than the population as a whole.”

  42. Also, the UI Hawkeye poll sample was only 305 with a margin
    of error of +/- 5.5%. The other more recent polls have had
    larger samplings with lower margin of error rates. Something
    to think about.

  43. Listen to this super-heated language from the racist Edwards , I’m afraid he’s self-destructing in IA, which is not necessarily a good thing for Clinton…

    Edwards went to New Hampshire Monday for what aides called a major thematic speech in which Clinton was a major punching bag. Broadly he portrayed Washington as awash in corrupt relationships between lobbyists and politicians and then specifically put Clinton squarely in the nexus of that relationship.

    “Senator Clinton’s road to the middle class takes a major detour right through the deep canyon of corporate lobbyists and the hidden bidding of K Street in Washington – and history tells us that when that bus stops there it is the middle class that loses,” he said, according to a prepared text distributed by his campaign.

    He framed the choice for Democrats this way in his speech: “Down one path, we trade corporate Democrats for corporate Republicans; our cronies for their cronies; one political dynasty for another dynasty; and all we are left with is a Democratic version of the Republican corruption machine.”

    Edwards called that the easy path of following the status quo. But he said that would perpetuate “a corrupt system that has not only failed to deliver the change the American people demand, but has divided America into two – one America for the very greedy, and one America for everybody else.”

  44. I also saw the Maria Shriver gig with the wives. Elizabeth starts getting on my nerves now, she comes off so self-righteous sometimes, and says that Johnny pretty much walks on water. I thought Michelle was the most real. Anne Romney spoke like a perfect Mormon wife, and Jeri was a dipshit. Where oh Where was the puppy eater..Judy G??? I think they are keeping her underwraps.

  45. Judy! She likes to be called Judith! Lol. (:
    I am nervous for tomorrows debate. How bad do y’all think they are going to attack her. They are pretty desperate.

  46. Hillary is aware how dangerous tomorrow night’s debate is. Politico is reporting that Hillary will be prepping for the debate today or tomorrow.

  47. Kegs, Thanks for some perspective on that Hawkeye poll. Did the newest Rasmussen Iowa poll come out?

    Also, I’m not totally NOT surprised that Obama has quantitatively received more positive press coverage than Hillary. Knew that for months.

  48. Almost everyone who reports on Obama’s gospel tour just calls McGherkin (?!) an “ex-gay”. I only read in one version that he had said that gays kills kids, and in only one other that Bush had used him to signal to gay-bashers that he was with them.

    Can anyone confirm this because if true, we would have the real “Bush-lite” in Obama.

Comments are closed.