Adult Experience

Update: Other sources have taken notice of what we pointed out regarding the Big Media narrative and the Big Media use of polls. Is this not the type of disinformation that the internet was supposed to fight against? Big Media is taking control of our Democratic nomination process and trashing our frontrunner in the same way Big Media will trash our Democratic Party nominee in 2008. They did it to Gore in 2000 and to Kerry in 2004. Big Media will try to do it again in 2008.

As much as we have derided, and will continue to criticize, MyDD – they are to be commended for noting how Big Media is trashing our elections. As usual Dailyhowler is on the job. TPM which usually participates in any Hillary bashing they can find (usually by the owner) has Greg Sargent on the job and doing good work. Taylor Marsh speaks up too. Hillary’s FactHub is counting the coverage as well.

When our elections get trashed by Big Media we learn who is willing to speak out and who is more concerned with their own self interests. PINOs, Naderites, and Big Blogs that pretend to fight Big Media – while getting book contracts and writing columns for Big Media that enrich the owners but do not take Big Media to task – are unmasked at these moments. These Quisling PINOs, Naderites, and Big Blogs are not our friends – they are the problem.

—————————————–

Poor Americans. Yesterday they had to be confused. Common sense told them Hillary is ahead and doing well in the presidential race. Big Media told Americans something else.

A reputable Gallup poll is published showing Hillary ahead, but all Big Media will discuss is a faulty interactive poll which shows Hillary behind. One (1) poll shows Obama barely ahead in Iowa and Big Media uses that one poll to negate all the polls showing Hillary ahead in Iowa, nationwide, and just about everywhere else. Little wonder that Americans do not trust their media. And Big Blogs which were supposed to be a remedy to Big Media misinformation – are no better.

We can only conclude that Americans will once again be surprised by the election results when Hillary wins.

While Big Media/Big Blogs continued their march into misinformation yesterday, Hillary continued to gather strength. In New Hampshire, Dr. Susan Lynch, spouse to the Governor, endorsed Hillary. In all likelihood the endorsement will help Hillary maintain her already substantial lead in New Hampshire.

Meanwhile Obama appeared on Nightline last night and kept up his weeks long slimy attacks on Hillary. Typical for Obama he began the Nightline interview with a lie.

TERRY MORAN: So let’s talk about experience, which you talk about a lot. You said recently that the strongest experience you have in foreign relations is that you grew up for four years as a child in Southeast Asia.

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Well, that’s not exactly what I said. What I said was I think one of the things that sets me apart is that I spent time in other countries.

No, Barack, that is exactly what you said:

“Probably the strongest experience I have in foreign relations is the fact that I spent four years living overseas when I was a child in southeast Asia.”

Terry Moran could have easily quoted ABC News’ own published reports to contradict Obama, but we suppose Terry does not read his own network’s reports.

If Terry does not watch or read his own networks reports, he could have watched CNN which had this amusing comment from Senator Joe Biden when Obama’s foolish statement first aired:

Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also joined the fray Tuesday afternoon when asked what he thought of Obama’s comments.

“I think he’s right,” Biden said smiling. “That is his strongest [foreign policy] credential.”

This is not the first time Obama has openly lied to Americans. Obama lied about “preconditions” and Obama lied about attacking Pakistan. TV reporter David Shuster essentially called Obama a liar on the Pakistan issue.

After his initial Nightline lie, Obama attacked Hillary’s experience:

MORAN: So you think her being first lady isn’t all that, isn’t as much as she’s claiming?

OBAMA: Well, look, I have no doubt that she is an intelligent, capable woman. There’s no doubt that Bill Clinton had faith in her and consulted with her on issues, in the same way that I would consult with Michelle, if there were issues. On the other hand, I don’t think Michelle would claim that she is the best qualified person to be a United States senator by virtue of me talking to her on occasion about the work that I’ve done.

And I think that Senator Clinton certainly has experience that she should tout, and I don’t think anybody would suggest that somehow she’s not qualified to be president of the United States, in terms of the work that she’s done in the United States Senate. I think she’s done some good work. But I think that, you know, there is a tendency to overestimate some of the experience that is out there. In fact, our most successful presidents have been people who were successful not because of their wealth of Washington experience, but because of the life lessons and schools of hard knocks that they had gone through. And that’s true whether you’re talking about Lincoln, or FDR, or any of our greatest presidents.

Maybe Obama is just dense. Michelle after all works in a hospital while he works as a Senator whereas Hillary worked with Bill Clinton in the White House. Can anything be clearer? Either Obama is being deliberately obtuse or he is not very bright. As to this nonsense about Lincoln not being experienced Obama needs an American History lesson to clue him in on Lincoln – the founder of the Illinois Whig Party and the National Republican Party, and long term player in national politics particularly on abolition and tarriff issues. And the dynastic FDR was no slouch when it came to be a major player in national politics.

This morning the Los Angeles Times has published an article which addresses Hillary’s experience.

She always came prepared. From the first planning sessions for her husband’s victorious 1992 presidential run through the final 1994 White House meetings she chaired as the Clinton administration’s ill-fated healthcare initiative collapsed, Hillary Rodham Clinton was a force to be reckoned with as a decision-maker.

Her debut on the national stage in the early 1990s was a defining era for Clinton, a period when she emerged as Bill Clinton’s most influential campaign strategist and policy advisor. She was forceful and methodical in shaping the Clinton administration’s domestic policies and political strategy, and proved to be a disciplined partner to her famously disorganized husband: commanding, opinionated, daunting.

“Bill talked about social change, I embodied it,” Clinton wrote in “Living History,” her autobiography.

Meetings were her milieu. She would arrive toting the crisp yellow legal pads she had carried habitually since her days as a corporate lawyer. Armed with an exhaustively researched grasp of the issues at hand, she would press for still more options while lacerating opposing arguments with surgical precision.

Clinton’s all-access pass into the West Wing gave her an intimate education in presidential decision-making that none of her opponents can claim. She observed at close range how big government works, and she learned painfully from her missteps how easily it bogs down.

The L.A. Times notes that there were difficulties in the White House years and that Hillary never had ultimate executive authority. But the difficulties then are pluses now:

Presidential historian James McGregor Burns, who studied the uneasy dynamics of the Clinton White House, said that even her setbacks amounted to “educational failures” that toughened her for the long run.

“She’s been tested over and over again,” Burns said. “The question for voters is whether they feel she passed those tests and whether they think she learned from them.”

Hillary’s history as an advisor in 1991’s presidential election campaign was presaged by experience in the 1972 and 1976 McGovern and Carter presidential campaigns. Once in the White House Hillary was a major player:

From the start, Clinton’s campaign role was left as amorphous as possible, allowing her to carve out her own domain.

“No one raised a question about how her role was defined,” recalled lawyer Mickey Kantor, the campaign chairman. “It was assumed. You wanted her involved at the highest level.”

Involved she was, and in everything. She used her ties to New York legal circles to raise cash and tap political pros. While staffers took a breather on a bus caravan through Texas, old friend Bill Burton watched as “Hillary sat in the back and took charge of a press release on natural-gas policy.” As she peppered her husband’s aides with strategy, she was empire-building — cherry-picking loyalists who would work at the core of her White House staff.

Kantor and other campaign veterans credit her as the driving force behind the rapid-response “war room” operation. Later, she rode herd on the “defense team,” a cloistered group of staffers and lawyers who fended off media queries about the couple’s financial deals, rumors of Bill’s infidelity and his youthful dealings with Arkansas draft officials during the Vietnam War.

“She methodically set down the counter-strategy in a disciplined way,” said Betsey Wright, who ran the unit from Little Rock, Ark.

Democrats who think the Ripublicans will sit back and sing Kumbaya after the next election have not been paying attention. Newt Gingrich deliberately set out in the 1990s to remove Democrats from power. Using tools such as “term limits”, scandal mongering (which drove out the Democratic Speaker of the House) and other hardball tactics coordinated with allied media outlets and talk radio the Ripublicans took control of the government.

The full sum of the Hillary White House years, the good and the bad, will prove valuable when Hillary becomes the chief executive.

Obama can tout his child tourism all he wants. But for the office of the President, we need someone with adult experience.

Share

206 thoughts on “Adult Experience

  1. Whoopi’s not happy:

    Whoopi Goldberg slammed John Edwards and Barack Obama’s wife, Michelle, Monday for canceling apearances on “The View.” Edwards and Mrs. Obama pulled out of an appearance on the show because they didn’t want to cross the Writers Guild picket line – but Goldberg resents any suggestion that she and co-hosts Barbara Walters, Joy Behar and Sherri Shepherd aren’t behind the writers. “It could have been handled differently,” she told the audience. “Because what they said made it look like we don’t care.” P.S.: We hear that Whoopi is a fan of Bill Richardson, and Hillary has strong support among other “View” ladies.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2007/11/27/2007-11-27_side_dish.html

  2. Jesse’s not happy.

    You would think he would talk to Obama instead of writing Op-ed’s. This is not the first time Jesse Jackson has tried to get Obama to listen by going public. The first time was during the Jena 6 episode. It sure looks like Jesse is not happy with Barack:

    Yet the Democratic candidates — with the exception of John Edwards, who opened his campaign in New Orleans’ Ninth Ward and has made addressing poverty central to his campaign — have virtually ignored the plight of African Americans in this country. The catastrophic crisis that engulfs the African-American community goes without mention. No urban agenda is given priority. When thousands of African Americans marched in protest in Jena, La., not one candidate showed up.

    http://www.suntimes.com/news/jackson/668053,CST-EDT-JESSE27.article

  3. obama’s campaign is so disorganized. Wow. His campaign has got to be a sad, sick joke, right? I mean, c’mon, the way he is acting, running, and lying, I can’t tell. Great news from NH with Dr. Lynch, and I hope the people of New Hampshire who vote early vote for Hillary.

  4. Obama’s campaign is a mess but it appears to be getting a lot of help. Pollster is trying to explain the Zogby poll results but can’t find any real answers to what Zogby is doing:

    Where does this leave us? Puzzled. If these results came from voting machines, I’d suspect that something in the ballot design or the recording mechanism caused a modest but consistent undercount of the Clinton support. The effect seems confined only to that one candidate, and not to any others, Democrats or Republicans. And there was no boost in support for the Republicans paired against Clinton. In this case, I’m similarly inclined to wonder if there is the possibility that the Zogby online survey had a glitch that caused a systematic “undervote” for Clinton. Certainly if my research assistant brought me these results, I’d want to check the software for mistakes before I published it.

    http://www.pollster.com/blogs/zogby_internet_poll_trial_heat.php

  5. President Bush saying nice things about Hillary was proof positive that the Republicans think Hillary has the best shot at the White House. Why would they have the Republicans most hated figure in a hundred years say something nice about the Democratic front runner unless they intended to injure her.

  6. Politico is either dumb or dumber. Under a headline called “Front-runner watch” they write this:

    “Obama is in danger of shedding his underdog status here. Newt says he’ll win Iowa.

    Over at Intrade Clinton is mostly flat, ticking down just slightly to a 69 percent chance of winning the primary, while Obama’s made his way up to 19 percent.”

    ——
    So according to Politicoi, Hillary is at 69% and Obama is moving up to 19% and this is somehow a problem for Hillary.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1107/Frontrunner_watch.html

  7. The media loves Obama and hates Hillary. I really do think men are struggling with losing power. Women need to wake up, IMO. There may be lots of women journalists but men control the media.

  8. I wanted to be sure to copy this important rebuttal info over from yesterday’s post:

    A David Corn post on MotherJones yesterday really ticked me off. Here and just about anywhere “Hillary haters” can be found BO’s PAC money tactics are excused, often with “well, Hillary does it”, referring to Hill PAC.

    *motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2007/11/6293_hypocrisy_alert.html

    Let me tell you once and for all. Hillary DOES NOT do it, too. I just read through more than 100 pages of Hill PAC’s Jan-Jun 2007 filing and there is NOT ONE $ given to any candidate. NOT ONE.

    See for yourself if you don’t mind getting all squint-eyed in the meantime.

    *images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?F27990432609

    HRC changed Hill PAC’s reporting dates since it is not in campaign mode. The next report won’t be until the end of the year (12/31/07; report due by 1/31/08).

    *images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?_27039392947+0

  9. Hillary came out of the “school of hard knocks” by spending those tough 8 yrs in the white house. still was standing tall then and is now…..

    And I believe she gained more WISDOM as well as experience through it. That is why she is still standing tall and smiling big!

    No one can take that from her!

  10. OMG. barack obama is now speaking at a live foreign policy discussion now. since i’m at work, i can’t watch it but it just seems too funny. didn’t he just join the foreign relations committee THIS YEAR and does he not make a fool of himself whenever he speaks on that committee?

    if americans want ANOTHER foreign policy-wise incompetent puppet, obama’s their man.

  11. rasmussen still has obama at 17, the new low:

    H 41
    O 17
    E 13

    Also, a Strategic Vision (R-leaning) IA poll has H 29, O 29, E 23.

  12. If you’ve not been following it, eriposte at The Left Coaster has been doing a series of articles linking to documents, quotes, etc. to compare MSM (plus BO/JE) spin on HRC to reality.

    You’ll love this one:

    In Parts 1, 2 and 3, I used voting records to show that portrayals of Sen. Hillary Clinton as a “Corporate Democrat” are extraordinarily misleading and that her actual voting record – although not perfect – is very progressive on matters pertaining to corporatist interests. I’d like to return to this topic today because one of Sen. Obama’s main criticisms of Sen. Clinton’s record has been on the topic of “special interests” [snip]
    I thought it would be worth focusing some attention on PAC/lobbyist contributions to Sen. Obama’s and Sen. Clinton’s campaigns, as well as their voting records (Since Sen. Edwards has taken very little PAC contributions in comparison and I don’t have his Progressive Punch voting scores, I am largely not including him in this assessment – however, I have discussed his voting record in Part 3).

    Continue reading : theleftcoaster.com/archives/011404.php

  13. It is a huge mistake for Obama to deny that Hillary has substantial executive experence, and that her experience relates directly to the job of President. Most people who know anything about the Clinton Administration realize that she was a major player, and a force to be reckoned with. Most people who know anything about the Presidency realize that his experience is as nothing compared to hers. If he were smart he would stipulate that her experience is superior to his and just move on. Instead, he tries to advance an indefensible position, and looks foolish trying. Another rookie mistake.

  14. eriposte concludes:

    In conclusion, if Sen. Clinton’s voting record is assumed to be that of a “Corporate Democrat”, then surely, Sen. Obama’s voting records are equally those of a “Corporate Democrat”. In reality, of course, the voting patterns of Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama are not consistent with those of a “Corporate Democrat”. This conclusion is also consistent with the fact that PAC/lobbyist contributions form only a tiny percentage of the total contributions they have both received.

  15. Jackson is clearly referring to Obama’s Booker T. Washington rhetoric in the following paragraph:

    The result is visiting a catastrophe on the urban black community. I and many others campaign for young people to stay in school, to graduate and not to make babies until they are prepared to be parents. My son and I write and teach about personal financial responsibility. Personal responsibility is critical. But personal responsibility alone cannot overcome the effects of a discriminatory criminal justice and economic system in generating broken families and broken dreams.

    Why else would Jackson publish his article in Chicago and not in New York or one of the early primary states? Moreover, does Jackson’s piece serve as a counterpoint to Oprah’s decision to campaign for Obama? Surely he submitted the piece to the Sun-Times Editorial Board just days after the Obama campaign announced Oprah’s tour through Iowa and New Hampshire.

    Jackson is a bright man, and his letter serves a purpose. I wonder if Sharpton and others will become more vocal this week.

  16. Well, actually, several of Hillary’s plans help urban blacks. That’s a cornerstone to her energy plan. I can’t remember the particulars, but a number of new energy jobs would go to the poor urban areas. I see this as an opportunity for Hillary, though. She should address Jackson’s comments with a plan.

  17. It should be (and should have been) mentioned that BO’s “Foreign Policy Forum with leading local and national foreign policy experts” are all members of this foreign policy advisory team (with the exception of “Adm. John Hutson (USN Ret.) – Bow, NH resident; Dean of Franklin Pierce Law Center; former U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General and nationally-known expert on detention and interrogation”, who was obviously added in to appeal to our NH voters).

    Guess Richard Clarke and Zbig were busy (he could have sent Mika, though).

    *Richard Danzig – Former secretary of the Navy under President Clinton
    *Tony Lake – National Security Advisor to President Clinton
    *Samantha Power – Pulitzer Prize-winning author and renowned professor of human rights and foreign policy
    *Susan Rice – Former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs
    *Senator Barack Obama

    my.barackobama.com/page/content/fpforum/

    They were profiled 10/2/07 at WaPo here: washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/documents/the-war-over-the-wonks.html

  18. Hey, since that Strategic Vision poll has Hillary tied with Obama, that must mean his “lead” has evaporated, lol.

    As for Newt saying Obama will win Iowa, that’s hardly going out on a limb. Remember, he has to win there, and Hillary does not. If she finished a very close second to him, she’s fine. But I also believe she has a real shot at winning there.

    Also, admin, thanks for posting part of the pollster.com analysis of the online Zogby poll. I read it this morning and was going to post the link. That’s a very good site for nonpartisan, thorough poll analysis, BTW.

  19. Hi, Paula: What is even more disturbing for Obama is how that tightening of the national race Zogby “showed” last week has evaporated in the new Rasmussen poll which shows Obama acceptable as the nominee to less than one in five Democrats.

  20. DCDemocrat, Do you mean less than four in five Democrats? I know his negatives among Dems are higher than Hillary’s in Rasmussen polling, but he has to be acceptable to more than one in five Dems, lol.

  21. I cannot believe what a devisive punk Obama is. Not in my 52 years, have I seen a presidential candidate for the Democratic party fan the flames of misogyny as he is doing. I am staggered at his rhetoric against Clinton and cannot imagine what it is he is thinking. This stuff, by and large, only works on the already converted. I think that’s the mistake he and Edwards are both making – they aren’t rising in the polls so they are saying what their supporters want to hear.

    Edwards is at least attacking Hillary within traditional campaign standards. He’s not dishing anything out that is far afield of what campaigns normally dish out. But Obama, is going for the homophobic, misogynistic vote – weird. He really should be a Republican.

  22. Hi, Paula: I was referring to his 17 percent in the Rasmussen released today. There is a 24 point spread between Hillary and What’s His Name, her next nearest competitor.

  23. Michelle seems to be parked in SC full-time:


    ORANGEBURG, S.C. — Barack Obama’s wife has a heavy message for blacks in this early voting Southern state: Her husband’s chances of defeating Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination may hinge more on them than they do on white voters.

    But at the core of her message in South Carolina is her argument that Obama, more than Clinton, former North Carolina senator John Edwards or any other presidential candidate, will do more for blacks because he understands them better.

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/21909.html

  24. Per politico:

    Explanation of the day: Hoopla

    My colleague Carrie Budoff Brown emails over the explanation from South Carolina State Rep. Harold Mitchell, who announced at an endorsement event with black ministers today that he was switching his support from Obama to Clinton:

    “I got caught up in the hoopla,” Mitchell said of Obama.

  25. hi hillfans, im upbeat about the rass national poll and stratigic vision poll showing a 29/29 iowa dead heat hillary with the punk. GO HILLARY GO!!!

  26. Let me get this straight, Hillary can not bring any attention to the fact that she’s a woman (the “sex card”) but BO/MO can now peddle the “race card”? Did I miss something?

  27. you said it b merryfield. obama and his big media boosters are 2 faced bsers. im african-american and i don’t buy his bs.

  28. Just picked up the following from Politico comments. I can’t begin to express how totally unlikely this is. Somebody’s BSing somebody, that’s for sure. Emphasis is mine.

    Note: When you get to the end of the actual article, you’ll find “Paid for by Obama for America”. In other words, this is BO’s report, not a media report. Few here in NH will ever see this.

    More than 1000 New Hampshire Independents Endorse Obama. As Obama hosts roundtable with independents in Littleton, undeclared Granite Staters praise his principled leadership, history of bipartisan results.

    MANCHESTER, NH – More than 1000 undeclared New Hampshire voters announced their intention to vote for Senator Barack Obama in the Democratic primary today. Citing his straightforward, principled approach and track record of putting results ahead of partisan political maneuvering, the Granite State independents endorsed Obama as the candidate they believe in to bring real change to Washington. “I’m tired of watching the Democrats and Republicans in Washington play political games while millions of Americans remain uninsured, the disastrous Iraq war goes on with no end in sight, and global warming goes unchecked,” said Russ Ouellete, an undeclared voter from Bedford. “It’s time for a President who will stop promising change and actually rise above the partisan gridlock to deliver on it. Obama is the one candidate in this race who can bring people together to put real results ahead of party politics.”

    Today at a roundtable with independents in Littleton, Obama reiterated his intention to be a president who forges bipartisan solutions on big challenges. As an Illinois State Senator and a United States Senator, Obama has worked with Democrats and Republicans to make government work for people – expanding healthcare coverage, providing tax relief for working Americans, and passing sweeping ethics reforms.

    campaignsandelections.com/nh/releases/index.cfm?ID=6993

  29. Ouellete is one of the two co-founders of Committee For An Independent Voice – NH. What I suspect is that he is casting a block vote on behalf of his organization (independents make up 44% of voters). NH folks don’t vote in blocks.

  30. Greg Sargent on the polls (via TM):

    Yesterday two polling firms — Zogby and Gallup — released surveys of the presidential race that offered strikingly different conclusions. The Zogby poll found that Hillary is trailing five leading GOP candidates in general election matchups. The Gallup Poll, by contrast, found that Hillary, and to a lesser degree Obama, has a slight to sizable lead over the top GOP contenders.

    A couple of other things that distinguish these two polls: The Zogby one is an online poll, a notoriously unreliable method, while the Gallup one is a telephone poll. And, as Charles Franklin of Pollster.com observed yesterday, the Zogby poll is completely out of sync with multiple other national polls finding Hillary with a lead over the GOP candidates. The Zogby poll actually found that Mike Huckabee is leading Hillary in a national matchup. The Gallup findings were in line with most other surveys.

  31. More from Sargent (who is not usually pro-Hillary):

    I don’t need to tell you which poll got all the media attention. Do I?

    The Zogby survey was covered repeatedly on CNN, earned coverage from MSNBC, Fox News, and Reuters and was covered by multiple other smaller outlets.

    By contrast, I can’t find a single example of any reporter or commentator on the major networks or news outlets referring to the Gallup poll at all, with the lone exception of UPI. … …

    … .. Worse, the Zogby poll was covered with few mentions either of its dubious methodology or of the degree to which its findings don’t jibe with other surveys. Bottom line: The Zogby poll was considered big news because many in the political press are heavily invested in the Hillary-is-unelectable narrative for all kinds of reasons that have little to do with a desire to, you know, practice journalism.

  32. TM also points out that Big Media is focused on the Oprah vs. Bill celebrity mash/bash and nobody appears to understand the real powerhouse in Iowa is EMILY’s List. Go figure !

    taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26612

  33. B Merry — Correct. Let’s also mention that the Oprah angle is designed to pander to women, so it’s A-OK if the Obama campaign panders using gender/race.

  34. Oprah is not just there to pander to women. She’s there to pander to Black women. As I just commented at TM, perhaps Oprah will offer an Obama and book of the month two-for-one special. Buy one and you get the other one free.

  35. Barbra Streisand endorsed Hillary today. She contributed to all three.

    I hope Obama continues to flap his gums about how Hillary was just a little wife. Will lead to a backlash.

  36. Yeah, I just heard a report on my lcal new england radio station about the zogby poll. It’s unbelievable. We are being spoon fed a pack of lies from the media.

  37. TM is on a roll today. She just got this one! Apparently — as caught on YouTube — Obama said

    “Suprisingly enough, even in rural Iowa, recognize the opportunity to send a signal to the world that, you know, we are not as ingrown, as parochial as you may perceive.” – Barack Obama

    Go see it: taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26614

  38. More on that conference (which was in Portsmouth, NH). Again Big Media fails to say that the “heavyweights” are BO sycophants. Emphasis mine.

    “Democrat Barack Obama, confronting claims that he’s light on foreign policy, surrounded himself Tuesday with heavyweights who said his differences with rival Hillary Rodham Clinton and others are just what the country needs: A new leader willing to talk with America’s enemies and become a better friend to struggling nations. [snip]

    ” In this seaport town Tuesday, he was embraced by several foreign policy advisers, …”

    Reminds me a little of the Emperor has no clothes.

  39. “Suprisingly enough, even in rural Iowa, recognize the opportunity to send a signal to the world that, you know, we are not as ingrown, as parochial as you may perceive.”

    good lord, he did NOT say that did he??? oh, was he trying to say “inbred” but forgot the word? that burns me. I mean you can joke about that if you’re *from* a rural town but not really if you’re from chicago

  40. I know people who travel outside of the states most of the time. They tell me Hillary is very popular internationally and that everyone thinks the US is too sexist to elect a woman. Why is that because Obama is black he acts as though electing the first woman president is same old same old? It really annoys me. Electing an african american man would be an extremely positive change. Electing the first woman president, wil be transformational. Electing an african american woman would be even more transformational. Women are the majority in the world, though the “leader of the free world” has never been a woman. It’s going to be an enormous change.

  41. Here’s a money quote from BO supporter Donna Brazile (then speaking at a forum 9/28 to Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) that he should run for Gov.):

    “You are living in a time when there is more promise politically for people of color than there has ever been. The only question is whether we are audacious enough and strong enough to embrace the opportunity. Finally, nobody is going to hand you anything in politics. I don’t care if you’re black, brown, green or purple. If you run, they going to lie. They going to attack you. They’re going to challenge your ideas. The question is whether you can do what candidates all over the country have to do which is to rise to the occasion and to win.”

  42. bad news breaking for edwards?

    Ames Local News
    BREAKING NEWS: Racist fliers found around Ames, Story County
    By: Luke Jennett
    11/27/2007
    Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
    Hand-scrawled photocopies bearing a racist message have been found at several locations throughout Story County, including on the Iowa State University campus and in the parking lot of Cub Foods in Ames.

    Advertisement

    The fliers say “Vote for Edwards, Not the Bitch or the Nigger. Vote for the White Man!”

    Authorities say that have not yet linked the fliers to their purported author. The note bears a name claiming to be the author and says he is a 1977 graduate of Harvard University.

    ISU police say the fliers were found Monday on a bulletin board at Davidson Hall. A report came in to Ames Police about the same time from a customer at Cub Foods who’d found copies of a flier which police said appears to bear racist remarks in the parking lot.

    Lt. Dru Toresdahl of the Story County Sheriff’s Office said the fliers had been stuck in the doors of two residences in Slater.

    Toresdahl said he didn’t see anything of a criminal nature about the flier.

    “At this point, I don’t see it as anything of a criminal nature,” he said. “They’re certainly inappropriate comments, but the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech.”

    More details will be available in tomorrow’s edition of the Tribune.

    Luke Jennett can be reached at 232-2161, Ext. 343, or ljennett@amestrib.com.

    Ames Local News
    BREAKING NEWS: Racist fliers found around Ames, Story County
    By: Luke Jennett
    11/27/2007
    Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
    Hand-scrawled photocopies bearing a racist message have been found at several locations throughout Story County, including on the Iowa State University campus and in the parking lot of Cub Foods in Ames.

    Advertisement

    The fliers say “Vote for Edwards, Not the Bitch or the Nigger. Vote for the White Man!”

    Authorities say that have not yet linked the fliers to their purported author. The note bears a name claiming to be the author and says he is a 1977 graduate of Harvard University.

    ISU police say the fliers were found Monday on a bulletin board at Davidson Hall. A report came in to Ames Police about the same time from a customer at Cub Foods who’d found copies of a flier which police said appears to bear racist remarks in the parking lot.

    Lt. Dru Toresdahl of the Story County Sheriff’s Office said the fliers had been stuck in the doors of two residences in Slater.

    Toresdahl said he didn’t see anything of a criminal nature about the flier.

    “At this point, I don’t see it as anything of a criminal nature,” he said. “They’re certainly inappropriate comments, but the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech.”

    More details will be available in tomorrow’s edition of the Tribune.

    Luke Jennett can be reached at 232-2161, Ext. 343, or ljennett@amestrib.com.

    Ames Local News
    BREAKING NEWS: Racist fliers found around Ames, Story County
    By: Luke Jennett
    11/27/2007
    Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
    Hand-scrawled photocopies bearing a racist message have been found at several locations throughout Story County, including on the Iowa State University campus and in the parking lot of Cub Foods in Ames.

    Advertisement

    The fliers say “Vote for Edwards, Not the Bitch or the Nigger. Vote for the White Man!”

    Authorities say that have not yet linked the fliers to their purported author. The note bears a name claiming to be the author and says he is a 1977 graduate of Harvard University.

    ISU police say the fliers were found Monday on a bulletin board at Davidson Hall. A report came in to Ames Police about the same time from a customer at Cub Foods who’d found copies of a flier which police said appears to bear racist remarks in the parking lot.

    Lt. Dru Toresdahl of the Story County Sheriff’s Office said the fliers had been stuck in the doors of two residences in Slater.

    Toresdahl said he didn’t see anything of a criminal nature about the flier.

    “At this point, I don’t see it as anything of a criminal nature,” he said. “They’re certainly inappropriate comments, but the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech.”

    More details will be available in tomorrow’s edition of the Tribune.

    Luke Jennett can be reached at 232-2161, Ext. 343, or ljennett@amestrib.com.

    ©Mid-Iowa Newspapers 2007

    ©Mid-Iowa Newspapers 2007

    ©Mid-Iowa Newspapers 2007 s?

  43. I have a problem which I am hoping to cure with this group therapy.

    I expect you know about Lent where you give up something for the 40 days before Easter. Well, on Sunday Advent begins for the 4 weeks before Christmas. It is a period of hope and expectation.
    Giving up something is not a major component but since I am fervently hoping for you-know-what, and seriously expecting a great result, I am not sure I can survive watching the news channels pretzel the facts and, in some cases, lie. (Count how many times CNN calls the Iowa poll where Obama leads “the latest”.) (See how many times MSNBC has that poll on their crawl without ever mentioning any other poll)

    I think I should refrain from watching this annoying propaganda and reading hateful blogs, esp. the Washington Post. It’s difficult to do. It’s a lot like wanting to learn what is happening by subscribing to the National Enquirer. Well, no, not exactly, because once in a while they have some facts in there.

    I was thinking that I might try confining myself to HillaryClinton, TaylorMarsh, and Hillaryis44. Oh and a polling site. And watch old movies. What do you think? At least here, you keep us up on the latest without the negative spin. I also love the personal reports from IA and NH. I am off to HRC HQ today and will report back after my shift is over.

    If someone has a better way to keep my bad heart from giving out or my head from exploding, I’m willing to try a 10-step program or even a 1-step program. Any suggestions?

  44. I see nothing wrong with Brazile’s comments to Artur Davis. Let’s put it in perspective — she’s talking about his running for statewide office in Alabama. She’s taking a very positive view, IMO — instead of focusing on the obvious challenge, she’s saying his opponents are going to attack him anyway, so go for it.

  45. HLR, I agree. I totally see nothing wrong with Brazile’s comments. Indeed, I think Hillary lives up to them. I just always thought she supported Hillary. I was surprised to learn she didn’t.

  46. Larry Johnson said on Taylor Marsh’s show that he could live with either a Hillary or JE administration, but not bo, because he has so many neocons on his team (Anthony Lake).

  47. did I just hear Bill’o riely in Obama when he refered to Iowans as “Rural Iowans not as ingrown, parochial as perceived”, just like O’riely said about the african american restaurant visit? I mean this is ridiculous. WHY DOESNT MEDIA PICK IT UP.. they were all arms for Bill’O Riely, now they wont do it to BO because he is african american?

  48. I’m sure that flier has nothing to do with Edwards. It has every fingerprint of Obama camp.

    BTW, while stupid dems are busy tearing down and buying into lies of their most formidable general election contender Hillary, smart republicans are busy rolling out their most electable candidate – Rudy.

    Look, Huckabee is the one who has the real MO in IA, he is now within two points to Romney in two polls in a row. He has a real shot of breaking out in IA, if he wins there, Romney is in big trouble, and will give Rudy an excellent chance to win late state primaries.

    Huckabee is busy teaming up Rudy in IA.

    ABC’s Kevin Chupka and Teddy Davis have Huckabee taking Rudy’s side in the weekend (and still-ongoing) spat between Hizzoner and Romney.

    Romney is going to have to learn to “take one upside the head” because former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is “an experienced fighter” who “knows how to do it,” Huckabee said in a conference call Monday morning.

  49. just shot off an e-mail to jack cafferty. I will e-mail almost all the major anchors and journalists including O’Riely. I mean I dont see ANY difference between,

    “I couldn’t get over the fact that there was no difference between Sylvia’s restaurant and any other restaurant in New York City. I mean, it was exactly the same, even though it’s run by blacks, primarily black patronship. ”

    and this statement

    “but they also, surprisingly enough, even in rural iowa recognise the oppurtunity to send a signal to the world that we are not as ingrown, as parochial as you may perceive or bush administration has communicated, but we are infact embrace the world, we are listening, we are concerned, we want to be engaged”

    Can a single person here or anywhere else explain to me the difference excetpt that one came from so called “racist” O’Riely and other came from “know all hopeful african american”? both are equally bigoted the way I see it.

  50. There’s a new Insider Advantage poll out for the GOP primary in Florida showing a huge surge for Mike Huckabee:

    Giuliani 26 (-7 vs. 10/19 poll)
    Huckabee 17 (+9)
    McCain 13 (+4)
    Romney 12 (-5)
    Thompson 9 (-4)
    Paul 3 (na)

  51. Yeah, Dems so often cut off their nose to spite their face, don’t they.

    Also, the MSM doesn’t make a big deal about Rudy trailing in Iowa. They still consider him the front-runner. Big double standard, if you ask me.

  52. I said long time ago Rudy would win this out in the end. Republicians are simply smarter than dumb dems. Poll after poll suggests republicans do not trust MSM at all, that’s why they’re going to select a STRONGEST contender possible despite George W. Bush’s dismal approval rating.

    On the other hand, dems are conditioned to buy into MSM’s lies. Most of them are easy to be fooled by MSM. That’s also why they rarely win presidential elections.

    I studied Rasmussen’s tracking poll on GOP race a bit today. It really looks to me a wide open race.

    Rudy 23
    Romney 15
    Huckabee 13
    McCain 12
    Thompson 12

    I think Huckabee will play an important spoiler for Rudy. He will likely stop Romney’s plan A in IA. I’m increasingly confident that Rudy will eventually win this thing with Huckabee as his VP.

  53. Paula,

    The conservative base is divided, and those GOPers are not stupid. After Romney spent tons of money, he rarely moves up in head-to-head matchups with dems. I think conservatives are not bought into Romney’s newly convertion. They are now having an attractive alternative Huckabee, that’s why Romney is in deep trouble. I don’t believe Huckabee can win their nomination, he simply does not have the resources, and he will be crushed by Rudy in Feb 5th states since those states are generally more liberal. But Huckabee will likely destroy Romney’s game plan.

    Rudy will benefit tremedously from a divided conservative base.

  54. Watch Intranet IA, they are now actually put the odds of a Hucabee win at 55% vs. Romney’s 46% despite the fact Romney has an average 7 points lead in aggregate polls.

    Right now, Clinton is tied with Obama at 47%.

    I personally think Clinton will lose IA, so it won’t matter. In a way, it’s a good thing since the expectations have been lowered tremedously.

  55. kostner, This may not be significant, but I’ve noticed a lot of recent polls that have McCain doing a little better than Rudy vs. Hillary. But I don’t think he has much of a chance, unless he pulls out an improbable win in NH.

  56. Kostner:

    I agree. “Conventional Wisdom” (i.e. the Georgetown Social Club) has already established the firm notion that Clinton has no prayer of winning Iowa from the juggernaught Obama rockstar campaign.

    Fine with me. I like that narrative.

  57. Paula,

    McCain has no prayer. He is too old, and the conservative base hates him…

    Many of you may think Rudy has too much baggage, but I do believe he is the strongest contender on the GOP side. I have been watching his head-to-head matchups carefully. Despite all the negative coverage of his personal life, shady business dealings etc, his #s have only deteriorated marginally over the cause.

    There is a reason he is very competitive despite the horrible macro trend GOP is facing. He is a moderate, and it matters, he showed some leadership during 911, and it matters to independents. He also has geographic advantage in terms of winning a GE.

    It looks to me GOP has the ability to self-adjust in order to maintain the power. They know they have gone too far to the right, and the only chance they can maintain the white house is to select a moderate and go back to the centre despite the fact Rudy is pro-choice, pro-gay rights etc. MSM pronounced Rudy’s candidacy was dead on arrival, but he’s still okay at the moment nationally, and will probably get a helpful hand from Huckabee to destroy his only threat – Romney.

    Mark my words, Rudy will get the nod.

    Simply put it, GOPers are just smarter.

  58. Not only will Rudy get the nod, but the MSM and the Georgetown Social Club will be willing accomplices in hiding his baggage (divorces, mob-connected Kerik, pedophile-priest) during the general election. They will ensure that none of Rudy’s negatives get any traction the media.

  59. IMO they will do ANYTHING to hold onto power. if it is rudy on their side, and obama or edwards on our side, he will tear these guys apart. He will leave Obama stuttering in a debate and I am not even kidding. If Obama thinks, Hillary has gone negative, he has got NO CLUE as to how difficult it will be once it gets to REAL debates, and Hillary hasnt even engaged him full time yet. she is just nibbling his inconsistencies one by one, just enough to blunt his advantages.

  60. Taylor Marsh has this update to the BO’s earlier “rural” Iowa comment. At the foreign policy forum he did today in Portsmouth, NH, Obama said:

    “One of the great pleasures of running for president is to go to some tiny town in Iowa and you’ve got some guy in overalls and a seahat to say what do you think about the situation in Burma, and you’re thinking that he’s going to ask you about corn, and he asks you about Burma.” – Barack Obama

    Yup! It’s another BO classic.

  61. hwc,

    I kind of disagree on that. I think MSM has covered quite a bit on Rudy’s baggage you mentioned, but unfortunately his GE #s have barely moved. I doubt it will hurt him further more in GE. Obama has gotten tremedous positive coverage, but imagine one negative ‘swiftboat’ type of ad getting snowballed in MSM for a week.

    My theory is that dems are easy to get fooled by MSM, but independents and GOPers simply don’t trust MSM, they don’t take everything MSM says at face value. I read a poll in the past saying that MSM is trusted by dems but not GOPers.

    The GE matchup #s are very troublesome for dems no matter who gets the nod, Gallup had the same opinion. I really believe only Hillary on the dem side has a shot at winning the white house, and that’s not even a given.

    I am rooting for a Huckabee win in Iowa. It can certainly blunt the media frenzy over the race on the dem side.

  62. ROFLMAO @ obamavangelist. I just did the unthinkable. I e-mailed O’Reiely about Obama’s statement on Iowa farmers. If he picks it up, media will be forced to ask Obama to defend the statement. Can anyone imagine if Hillary would have said such a thing (which I am positive she wouldnt, because she herself is from a small town upbringing), she would have been roasted and toasted by now. Hypocrisy sucks and I hate it!

  63. kostner, I think Hillary is the Dems’ only chance in the GE, too. However, I still think most of the country knows little about Rudy outside of his role in 9/11. Remember, polls show many Repubs don’t even know he’s pro-choice. His negatives are around 30-35 percent now; they’re going to get higher if he becomes the nominee. You can count on it.

    That being said, I agree he’s the Repubs’ strongest candidate.

  64. If you don’t think BO has his own version of obamavangelism going, here’s his quote from 11/26/07 from ABC’s Nightline:

    “Every place is Barack Obama country once Barack Obama’s been there.”

  65. One thing we all should keep in mind: No president as unpopular as Bush at this point in his presidency has seen his party keep the White House in the next election.

  66. Facthub has put up Bill Clinton’s statement on Iraq. Infact, all these so called antiwar “progressives” of today actually are supporting Edwards. Here are the two videos of who said what on the senate floor during Iraq war debate. Edwards like a chameleon, has shifted his rhetoric and admitted his mistake, just like he espoused all other positions while he was in senate and 2004 run including UHC, however Hillary stuck with it because she didnt think her vote was a mistake since she had repeatedly said her vote was for UN negotiations, and ONLY as last resort, if all inspections and negotiations fail, should bush administration take the route of war. Now, it is a different thing that bush deceived everyone in the senate and congress and took america to the war, but facts are facts, and factually, she voted in favour of negotiations and supported diplomacy during her vote on war in Iraq and here are the two videos.

    Hillarys speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSu0zXCR9sE
    Edwards speech : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY6BZgkI0kI

  67. glad,

    I just emailed to fix, I feel dirty, hehe.

    Paula,

    Rudy’s negativity has already risen up to 40+ in most GE matchups. He’s no longer the 911 hero. In the end, candidates’s neg. from both parties will likely rise to around 50. This is just the nature of political campaign.

    BTW, public sentiment on major issues is extremely fleeting, it can shift almost overnight. Iraq war next year may actually become GOP’s assets and dems’ baggage. Just imagine a scenario that GOP nominates a moderate, at the same time, dems nominate a peacenik and anti-war frantic Obama & Edwards.

    Pew just released a new poll on Iraq war. You can see how volatile public opinions are… If George W. Bush manages to get his approval ratings back to 40+ next year…

    WASHINGTON – The public increasingly believes the U.S. is making military progress in Iraq but still wants President Bush to remove American troops from the country as quickly as possible, a poll showed Tuesday.

    People are evenly split over how well the military effort in Iraq is going, with 48 percent saying it is going well and the same number saying it isn’t, according to a survey by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center. In February, shortly after Bush announced he would send additional troops to the country, only 30 percent said things were going well.

    Stark partisan divisions remain, though even growing numbers of Democrats cite gains. While 16 percent of Democrats said in February that things were going well, that figure has grown to 33 percent — less than half the 74 percent of Republicans who felt that way.

    Overall, 43 percent said the U.S. is making gains against the insurgents, up 13 percentage points from February. The percentage of people seeing progress reducing civilian casualties has more than doubled to 43 percent, while the number seeing results in preventing civil war is 32 percent, almost double the February level

  68. Ok. So this new Iowa poll show’s Obama and Hil tied? Is that right? Is the media falling all over that poll as well?

  69. Just read this Washington Post article. It just shows you how clueless dems are on Iraq war. Pelosi is teaming up with a loser, gosh… Sometimes, I really wish they lost election after election. Geez.

    It may be among the strangest of political alliances: a former commanding general in Iraq, blocked from a fourth star and forced into retirement partly for his role in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, and the speaker of the House, desperate to end a war that the general helped start.

    But in partisan Washington, the enemy of one’s enemy can quickly become a friend, and nowhere is that more obvious than in the new marriage of convenience between Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez.

    On Saturday, Sanchez delivered the Democrats’ weekly radio address. He excoriated what he called the Bush administration’s “failure to devise a strategy for victory in Iraq,” then embraced Democratic legislation linking continued war funding with a timeline aimed at ending U.S. combat operations by December 2008.

    For Democratic leaders, Sanchez’s address has been a triumph, covered by the media nationwide. It interrupted a stream of stories about declining violence, which had stalled efforts to force a shift of war policy.

    But for critics of the war and of Sanchez’s command, the radio address was curious. Andrew Bacevich, who was an Army officer in the Vietnam War and now teaches at Boston University, said Sanchez fundamentally misunderstood the nature of the conflict he faced. Sanchez’s troops employed “kick-down-the-door” tactics that hardened resistance to the U.S. occupation, and helped turn an insurgency in its infancy into a guerrilla war spinning out of control, he said.

    “Why he has chosen all of a sudden to attempt to return to public attention, and why he would do it in an overtly partisan way, frankly baffles me,” said Bacevich, whose son was killed in Iraq. “And why the Democratic leadership would say, ‘Yes, this is the guy who is going to deliver our message’ is just baffling. He is a largely discredited figure.”

  70. kostner, Rudy’s negatives aren’t over 40 percent in any of the polls on pollingreport.com, or even close. That may just be the case with Rasmussen.

    Also, I agree with you on Iraq. That’s why I’m glad Hillary is focusing on health care, the economy and other issues.

  71. kostner, It’s interesting that Bush’s approval ratings haven’t benefited at all from the lessening violence in Baghdad. They may eventually, but I wonder if the public has just given up on him and can’t wait till his term is up. The country’s mood still isn’t good, and that hurts an incumbent.

  72. we are so pathetic !!!

    not one of us wants to lose iowa, (or whatever that little town is called), and when i hear people say its okay we dont care if we do, we are lieing through our teeth… LOL

    it will hurt us personally if we do, not just because its not fair to hillary, but because we will hate to see someone of b o’s character be rewarded…

    so i will say it, i will be so sad and maybe a little scared if we lose the
    iowa thing… scared that the evil machinations of obama and his campaign, could actually steal christmas…

    i am getting calmer cause at this point, its totally out of our hands… 🙂

  73. united 12,

    of course nobody wants to lose iowa, if we win, the game is over.

    Having said that, we have to prepare for the worst, that’s my philosophy in life. It generally works very well. When I’m mentally prepared for the bad scenario, I usually get good results in the end.

    I am not scared of losing iowa. This is life, you have to deal with it and move on to the next stop.

  74. I am so pissed at Oprah stumping for Obama. Well, everyone has the right to make a mistake – so, I will let her make hers. But, I am so bloody pissed. Cannot stand her anymore. She should stay far away from politics!!! A woman who built her career on “women stepping up for other woman” – her action reeks of double talk and hypocrisy!!

  75. The hand bill story about the ‘bitch and the nigger’ epithets seems like another ham handed attempt by Republicans to continue the Dem infighting seeing Edwards is odd man out..hee!

    I haven’t given up on Iowa..Hillary has just as much chance, if not more, of winning Iowa than any of the other candidates.

    She’s init to win! And so are we!

    Mrs. S.

  76. I read this statement on the Zobgy website: Mark Penn “buckling under the pressure of an unfavorable poll.” A veteran op like Penn is ‘buckling under pressure’? That’s obviously false–Penn just laughed off the Zogby poll. Besides that, it is an inappropriate for a pollster to interject its opinions into a political campaign that it is polling.

    ‘Mark Penn: Buckling Under the Pressure of an Unfavorable Poll

    All is fair in love and war, the centuries–old proverb states. Politics is not included, but given the way the game is played in modern–day America, maybe it should be. That’s the sense I had again this morning watching Mark Penn, the chief political strategist for Democrat Hillary Clinton, denigrate our latest Zogby Interactive survey simply because it showed his client in a bad light (Link to Latest Poll Number). Penn made the contention on the MSNBC morning news program hosted by Joe Scarborough”

    Does that sound like a neutral pollster to you?

    I understand Penn took some shots at the credibility of Zogby polls. Zogby cited the fact that Penn frequently asks Zogby for data — that would have been a sufficient response. But for a pollster to get involved ‘Bill Riley style’ in the back-and-forth gunfire of a campaign it is polling — — that’s amazing. This statement from Zogby does more damage to their credibility than anything Penn could say.

    Zogby stated that it’s not unusual for campaigns to tighten late in the race. It is also not unusual for candidates to dismiss polls that don’t favor them.

    So why does Zogby feel a special need to respond ‘Bill Riley style’ to Penn’s comment?

  77. Someone should tell Zogby that nonpartisan pollster.com also found the poll unreliable. It’s clearly an outlier at this point. It’s not that it’s Zogby so much as it’s interactive, which are considered problematic.

  78. Zogby internet poll is just garbage and he’s still selling that stupid stuff. Even his telephone polls are quite questionable. According to Zogby, it should be president Kerry in the white house at the moment.

  79. btw,

    I tried something innovative today. Do you still remember Obama’s anti-gay scandal a month ago? I’m amazed how many gays don’t even know this episode.

    I went to a popular gay online community gay dot com’s chat room. They have grouped gays into different geographic locations. I went to their Iowa chat room, then cut and paste Obama’s anti-gay stories there.
    There are more than 100 people in that room. Many people don’t even know this story!

    I spent a few minutes chatting with three folks, I didn’t tell them I was for Hillary, just told them I was adamantly against Obama. One guy is for Hillary, but unfortunately he won’t bother to caucus, the other guy is still undecided grad student at UoI, but he’ll definitely caucus. After I told him Obama’s anti-gay story, it’s clear he’ll rule out Obama. He seems to lean towards Edwards and told me he would attend an Edwards event next week. He also seems to like a ‘woman’ for a change. I didn’t want to push for Hillary, just told him never to vote for Obama.

    This is quite an innovative way to help out Clinton. I hope there are other sites we can do the same!

  80. I think it’s useless to paste on some liberal blogs, those people’s minds are set. We need to reach out to other non-political chat room, forums etc…

  81. I hope Clinton campaign or any pro-Hillary independent groups will pick up this idea!! Obama has lots of stories for us to tell targeted audience. This is real micro-targeting!!

    For instance, is there any popular chat room, online community for Iowa farmers?? Why can’t any pro-Hillary independent groups go there and tell those members the latest slur against Iowa farmers by Obama?

    I read somewhere a pro-Hillary independent group wants to pay people money to write on political blogs. Does anybody know how to contact them? It’s useless to post pro-Hillary comments on political blogs. Political junkies who visit these sites are the least valuable target. They need to reach out to other non-political blogs/chat room/online community, ideally with a focus on Iowa to spread Obama’s dirty stories!

  82. Kostner, you are exactly right regarding the uselessness of the Big Blogs and the Big Media.

    Putting information out on non-traditional political meeting places such as AOL forums, social forums and chat rooms is a much more productive use of time.

    The political “blogosphere” is an echo chamber. It is still useful to post and argue on political sites but communicating on sites like the ones you describe is much more likely to get information out to the people that need to be informed.

    It is startling to hear that people who post on gay community sites are not aware of the McClurkin story and what Obama did.

  83. mj,

    I’ll try to do it one more time in Iowa gay chat room, hopefully I can convert anyone to abandon Obama!
    I had a heated discussion with another guy. He knew this story and tried to tell me the ‘other side’ of the story since the minister of his church was obviously pro-Obama and sat on some sort of Obama’s gay-friendly committe. I slammed him. He still claims to be undecided at the moment, but I won’t spend time on him.

    Anything negative about Obama is helpful. I also talk about he’s unelectable in general election, which many people seem to agree.

  84. admin,

    This is what I called the dead corner of political campaign. Most people are non-political. If MSM does not cover it, people simply don’t know.

    Many gays are not really politically active even in Iowa!

  85. kostner, that was an anti-Hillary smear site, trying to spread the rumor that Hil’s online supporters were just paid operatives.

  86. Kostner, that pay for comments site was a parody site which of course received a lot of attention on Big Blogs as an example of how Hillary has to pay people to promote her candidacy on the internets.

    Places to post: Agriculture schools should get the information on Obama and his comments about rural communities. Any and all gay sites regarding McClurkin. Any and all southeast asian sites regarding Obama’s attack Pakistan comments.

    It is going to be hard communicating with Iowa and NH voters during the holidays and this is another good way to reach these voters.

    BTW, while targeting Iowa voters specifically is a good idea, posting on sites they might visit is good too. For instance, all agriculture schools can be contacted about Obama and his comments, this would reach out to Iowa agriculture groups. 4H has to have a website and chatrooms.

  87. admin

    I don’t have time, can you do some research and post some agriculture sites which can reach out to Iowa?

    We then can work there, and cut and past Obama’s latest slur there.

  88. BTW, Kostner, there are sure to be many sites which discuss Oprah. Oprah can be a way to open a conversation about McClurkin on many types of gossip/celebrity sites.

  89. My college daughter’s gay guy friends knew all about the McClurkin scandal and had obviously been talking about it. She knew that he was not only a gay-basher but a “saved” gay. I think her friends are regular readers of The Advocate.

    I had sent her the Hillary interview in The Advocate to pass along.

  90. Yesterday, Hillary told Katie Couric that she does not think about the possibility that she will not be the nominee. Today, Mad Man Matthews and his toadies jumped all over that statement. They claimed it was a reaffirmation of the inevitablity theme, and once again they were wrong.

    If those partisan talking heads had any grasp of the concept of leadership, then they would recognize that Hillary was displaying the very kind of mental toughness that we need in the primary, the general election, and to put this country back on the right track. This kind of toughness inspires supporters and discourages adversaries–including those who read this site.

    For what is worth, I think Hillary’s logic applies in
    full measure to Iowa. We have the best candidate, the best team and the best solutions for our country. The rest is noise. Obama is the one who should be worrying about what happens when he loses Iowa.

  91. Just chatted with another guy. This guy actually attended today’s President Clinton’s event. He will go to see Oprah in Dec. Don’t get fooled though. He will never vote for Obama, he just wants to see a celebrity…

    He may actually end up with Rudy…

    LOL.

  92. Obama is clearly having some troubles, IMO. He had to have that foreign policy summit. That’s because he made that silly claim about his experience in first grade, or whatever. He also had 1000 “undeclared” voters in NH come out for him. That shows he is not winning over the Dem’s, IMO. The media adores him and paints everything as positive for him. Long term, I think this will actually help Hil. Most voters distrust the media. And, this gives her sometime to rejuvinate the momentum. Also, Obama bringing Oprah in? It does look desparado. It may turn off men. And, it’s a blatant pander to women. I think that will leave a bad taste with alot of women. Oprah really flew the coop on this one. After a career of being nonpolarizing, she’s made herself a polarizing figure. Also, no one wants to vote for the Stedman candidate.

  93. mj: Also, no one wants to vote for the Stedman candidate.

    LOL, this is funny.

    Do you mean because he’s Stedman or because he’s in business w/ Armstrong Williams? Either way, it’s funny.

  94. Because he’s Stedmen. A dud who never married her for questionable reasons. Look she’s had some major screw ups. Ofcourse, she is extremely successful, but she’s also had some very public fiasco’s.

  95. We tend to associate the term “narcissism” with the freshman senator from Illinois. Therefore, I decided to consult Webster’s Dictionary to be sure we are using the right word. Towit:

    1. inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self love, vanity.

    Yup, that’s the Obama we know. And, as he famously said, what you see is what you get.

  96. As promised (threatened?), here is my report from Las Vegas. The HQ was humming with volunteers. When they found me in the computer, they made me a precinct captain. I was interested to all sorts of young people with all sorts of titles, and then as usual couldn’t tell them apart.

    They don’t expect a lot of caucus goers but I think they could be wrong because the last time around they were at the tail end and all was decided. I made a few dozen calls and got a nice enthusiastic response from, let’s call it as we see it, senior citizens, esp. women. They will show up.
    Young people less likely. And cantankerous souls kept telling me that they will vote for Hillary but they won’t show up for the caucus. So much for understanding how this works.

    We will have to do this all again in January because Christmas and the New Year will wipe all this out of most people’s head. Nevertheless, unless we see some serious gains for Hillary, we can move for Nevada to be the first in the nation and put Iowa last.

    A great many people here say, when you ask about their support for Hillary, “Of course!” What do they put in the corn in IA? I wore a Hillary button and got a hug from a checker in the grocery store. We are going full steam ahead and determined to fix any slipup that precedes us. More later.

  97. Because he’s Stedmen.

    I associate him w/ National Enquirer/Star covers. It seems like every week there’s some drama playing out in those magazines involving Oprah-Stedman.

    I was just looking at Oprah’s message boards — mostly silly stuff, but I thought everyone might enjoy this comment:

    While Obama is an eloquent speaker, he is not a book, pajamas or a tote bag.

  98. ROFLMAO @ HLR.. awesome post! I e-mailed Oprah and asked her what how she felt about Obama’s actual realization that rural americans were surprisingly not parochial or “ingrained” 🙂

  99. As for the GE, it so happens that neither O or E are good in debates. It’s surprising but they are orators, not ebaters. Since that is when most of the country will make up their mind, it doesn’t bode well for their chances. In fact, other than Hillary and probably Biden, there are no good debaters.

    As for Repubs, they haven’t much going for them so they will be in endless attack mode. Hillary has the perfect style to keep talking about the people while he – whoever he is – talks about her.
    It won’t wash. And if the economy gets any worse, we will be begging to have someone competent to cover our Katrinas, fix our bridges and get our young into and through school.

    I think that, by January, Reps may pick Mitt — he looks the part. But I’ll know more after tomorrow. When is the Kerik trial? When is the Rezko trial?

  100. BTW,

    I’m reporting the conversation I had with another two guys that Iowa chat room a few mins ago. Those two are definitely going to caucus. One is in Cedar(?) I believe. He’s not aware of Obama’s anti-gay story, so I gave him the link and he’s very interested. He’s still undecided between Edwards and Clinton. He didn’t even know the race was so tight in IA, and thought Clinton had 20 points lead… Another politically deaf guy. So I pushed him a bit on selecting Clinton to stop Obama. His gay roommate is also not impressed with Obama.

    Another guy is from Des Moines(?)… He knew about that anti-gay story, he’s a Hillary leaner, looks pretty firm, so I reiterated to him the importance of stopping Obama in Iowa.

    I am going to continue this work tomorrow, the day after tomorrow!!!

    I hope Hillary supporters who read this blog will pick up this idea, and work online with local Iowans to derail MSM’s coronation of Obama there.

    Keep up the good fight.

  101. btw,

    Another important thing in those conversations is to push ‘electability’ theme. This is very very important.
    Some people may still like Obama, but we should tell them bluntly we will never ever vote for him in general election due to a variety of reasons, and tell them Obama is basically ‘unelectable’. So those Obama sympathizers/leaners who are still considering other candidates may have to pause before they decide to caucus for him…

    This is very effective.

  102. gladiatorstail,

    I hope we can work on some Iowa agricultural sites quickly. We need to kill Obama’s chance in rural areas fast.

  103. Craig Crawford was on Dan Abrams tonight (along with Obama supporters Stephanie Miller and Lawrence Something-or-other).

    Dan poured ice water on the notion that Oprah’s involvement would have a significant impact on voters in the early states. Miller and Lawrence disagreed and offered up the party line that it would, based on dubious reasoning.

    Craig agreed with Dan that it would not. His reasoning was that Oprah cannot provide Obama with what he needs at this point, which is proof of experience and competence. The only thing she can offer him is celebrity status and he already has that. Craig also said that based on 30 years experience covering Iowa, the voters there would not be unduly influenced by Oprah, and it could even have the reverse effect.

  104. Freckles great work in Nevada. Congratulations on being a precinct captain. As things heat up after Iowa there will probably be a lot of excitement in Nevada. It seems like a lot of supermarket checkers are for Hillary because we keep hearing stories about them saying good things about Hillary. As to the debates in the general election: We imagine Obama in a debate with the Rips would blame Clinton and the Democrats for all that is wrong in the world. The Rip candidate would keep asking about the Taliban guy that endorsed Obama over and over again.

    HillaryLandRocks, funny line, although we are not sure that Obama isn’t a tote bag.

    Kostner, probably Cedar Rapids. Amazing the guy does not know about McClurkin. The chat boards are the way to get the information out. Perez Hilton’s site discussed the McClurkin story when it was happening. Perez Hilton was angry with Obama and Perez supports Obama. Also funny that the assumption was that Hillary was 20 points ahead.

  105. wbboei, Craig Crawford is very dismissive of Oprah being of any real help. The Obama people must figure that it is better to get good headlines with Oprah than few headlines without Oprah. But the argument Obama needs to make is that he has sufficient experience to be president. Appearing on fashion magazine covers and with Oprah does not accomplish that mission.

  106. Stephanie Miller? Wow, that’s disappointing. Where are the professional women for Hillary? Honestly, it’s just pathetic to me. Hillary is head and shoulders above her competition. I think she’s one of the best candidates in my lifetime. Ofcourse the male dominated media despises her, But I am truly disappointed by all these socalled “liberal” women in the media who are not supporting her.

  107. Wow, Oprah’s campaign tour could turn the Obama campaign into a million little pieces. LOL. Maybe it’s not so good to be beloved by Oprah. Heh.

  108. admin,

    I think two things can kill Obama’s chance in Iowa’s rural areas. We need to find out those popular chat rooms/sites where they discuss cattles etc…

    One is his latest slur against Iowa farmers and his elitist attitude.

    The second is his assertion of granting illegal immigrants driver’s license.

    This is real micro-targetting!

  109. admin,

    if you can do some research and find out some popular agri sites with Iowa as focus, we can go there,cut and paste Obama’s dirty stories accordingly. If we can arouse some interest, that will be great.

  110. If we have any direct proof that Republicans are supporting Obama to any appreciable degree, financially or otherwise, then that could be of interest to primary voters as well.

  111. “HWC, what do you daughters and their friends think of Hill?”

    It doesn’t really matter — they are all registered to vote at college in Pennsylvania, whose primary is quite late. They are in Joe Sestek’s district — he makes regular appearances at her school and the head of the College Democrats there was his internet webmaster during his campaign in 2006.

    One of her friends worked in Obama’s Senate Office this summer, but turned down the offer to take a semester off from college to work in his campaign. She wasn’t sure he could win.

  112. But I am truly disappointed by all these socalled “liberal” women in the media who are not supporting her.

    When the female members of the Georgetown Social Club tuck their young daughters into bed at night, they like to say, “You know, Jessica, one day your brother could grow up to be President. You could be First Lady!”

    That obnoxious woman from The Nation was on MSNBC tonight trashing Clinton again. She says her heart is with Kucinich. And, they wonder why Republicans win every Presidential election.

  113. Giuliani strong in Florida, but Clinton stronger still?
    by Mark Silva

    Here’s something worth remembering – five weeks from the Iowa caucuses, but nearly one year from Election Day 2008:

    In Florida, scene of tonight’s televised debate of the Republican candidates for president, Rudy Giuliani holds a comfortable advantage over any of his party’s rivals, but Hillary Clinton, front-running Democrat, holds a comfortable advantage over Giuliani in a theoretical general election-matchup.

    This is the nation’s fourth-largest state, a place that hasn’t sided with many Democrats since World War II – Southerners mainly: Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, but only in his reelection bid. And, well, Al Gore, if you listen to his lawyers.

    But, for whatever advantage the former mayor of New York holds in the state that will hold its primary elections on Jan. 29 – over the objections of national parties which vow to penalize the state in its seating of delegates at the 2008 presidential nominating conventions — the candidate who may rule the stage of Republicans debating in St. Petersburg tonight could face one tough fight for the Sunshine State if he becomes the GOP’s nominee and Clinton is the Democrat.

    The possible margin of error is roughly 5 percent among the Republicans surveyed and 3 percent among all the likely voters surveyed in a general election qestion.

    These are the preferences that the poll found among Republicans::

    Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani : 38 percent

    Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney :17 percent

    Arizona Sen.. John McCain: 11 percent

    Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson : 11 percent

    Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee: 9 percent

    Texas Rep. Ron Paul: 5 percent
    .
    California Rep. Duncan Hunter: 1 percent

    No opinion: 9 percent

    Now, asking all 945 voters surveyed: If Hillary Clinton were the Democratic Party’s candidate and Rudy Giuliani were the Republican Party’s candidate, who would you be more likely to vote for — Clinton, the Democrat, or Giuliani, the Republican?

    The answer:

    Clinton : 51 percent

    Giuliani: 42 percent

    Neither: 5 percent

  114. HWC, I am hearing alot of people say Hill should get back above the fray and stop letting Obama get to her. I would like to see her be a little less reactive, at this point. What do you think?

  115. mj,

    I think we have to stop fretting over those talking heads… It’s not productive at this stage.

    Follow my suggestion to spread words to those Iowans to derail MSM’s coronation of Obama. This is the priority.

  116. I would like to see her be a little less reactive

    What is bothering you specifically?

    Just b/c bloggers are so easily offended doesn’t mean that the campaign’s strategy is poor. I don’t claim to know what their internal tracking is telling them in IA, but I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing to have him blurting out that just because he discusses issues w/ MO, she isn’t qualified to be a senator or to belittle Hillary’s time in the WH in general. Perhaps it’s just my imagination, but he’s increasingly coming off as kind of arrogant w/ a super-inflated sense of self.

  117. gladiatorstail, all — just a thought, don’t mention where you’re posting. It’s like leaving bread crumbs.

  118. mj- I too am at a loss to explain why certain professional women who profess to be liberal do not support Hillary.

    I could speculate, but if I did so I would quickly become as unscientific, counterintuitive and otherwise inscruitable as. . . as a Zogbe Poll!! Two of those in one week is two too many.

  119. goodness someone posted this. Maybe Obama should see this and decide if all Hillary was doing was sitting at dinner table. There were people booing her in the crowds. Despite that, she finished the speech, she fought, she lost. she got smarter, came out with a more practical plan, she will solve the crisis. the crisis hasnt changed, just the audience have. and the same people who were booing are the ones in desperate need of the same. the people who were booing were these John Edwards and Obama’s, who called themselves “progressives”. The debate hasnt changed, just some of the participants have “flipped”.

    http:// www. youtube. com/watch?v=jtDRnS7EEqQ
    http:// www. youtube. com/watch?v=KNPBB4DxoFU

    remove spaces.

  120. I think Obama’s answer about his wife, Michelle, is about as toxic as you can get. He implied that his wife’s “experience” consists entirely of what he tells her about his job. She couldn’t have won his Senate seat? If he disappeared, she couldn’t run for his seat?

    No wonder she always looks, and sounds, as if she’d like to hit him upside the head as in the V-8 commercials. In their next fight, that will come back to bite him.

    BTW, I think they just announced that Florida is 51-42 Clinton over Giuliani (he’s the R fav). Big news because w/o Fla, things are bad for the R. Puts an end to unelectable nonsense for Hillary.

  121. Headed out to troll my blog list but wanted to mention two things.

    1. freckles, I had just had the same thought on BO – MO and I don’t doubt that more than just a few folks are scratching their heads over his dissing his wife’s abilities. She’s out there stumping for him but he wants to say she’s only part of his echo chamber? Not too smart.

    I can’t see a whole of women buying that load of manure, particularly Black women. This is NOT at tactic his advisor Donna Brazile would endorse.

    Very cavemanish … or pure Baptist Fundamentalist, take your pick.

    2. The two minutes of Scabby Joe that I watched before coming online showed a clip of Karl Rove on the Charlie Rose show rewriting the Iraq war vote history. Now he says that it was Congress’s idea to go to war in Iraq and Bush didn’t want to rush into war prematurely.

    Major BS alert. He was an architect of the whole damn thing … who’s he think he’s kidding with that one? Repugs? Well, as dumb as they may be, even Repugs should know enough to avoid that shit pile.

    Other than pimping his upcoming book, what could be Rove’s motive?

    Well, how about this one? Hillary was in Congress when it voted. A Repug GE scenario could run, based on Rove’s expert insider info, that she single-handedly persuaded Congress to go to war. It’s only right that she gets the blame for everything that eventually went wrong as a result.

    The war’s failings are Hillary’s failings.

    Just wait and see how quickly the talking heads start pushing that scenario.

  122. Here’s some insight on BO (and Iowa — and how he gets away with his nonsense) from a TaylorMarsh commenter:

    The little Iowa weeklies [about 1000 subscribers] hate Hillary. She won’t return calls or show up for interviews. But guess who they love.

    WEEKLIES VIE FOR CANDIDATES’ ATTENTION
    (firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/11/27/483605.aspx)

    We’ve offered her front-page space for the past 10 months — just like all the other candidates.
    See. The guy from the little weekly has been after Hillary for 10 months. Actually he says he offered all the candidates front page spreads. It took Hillary 10 months to get back to him. Guess who got back quicker:

    “In contrast, Beaudoin praised Obama’s efforts to reach out to his paper, which included an attentive advance and communications staff who reached out to him before and during a tightly packed event at a cattle auction in Dunlap, Iowa. He added that he was sought out by the campaign along with another local reporter and given private time with the candidate.”

    – – – –
    The commenter wrote:

    Hillary turned up her nose for 10 months. obama gets praised for reaching out to the paper. Wow. obama got right back to him. That’s great. Guess when obama sought him out? 10 months ago when the weekly first offered? No. 9 months ago? No. obama got right back to him Saturday, the 24th of November:

    Obama discusses issues at livestock auction
    11/27/2007 (zwire.com/site/index.cfm?
    newsid=19062746&BRD=2703&PAG=461&dept_id=553867&rfi=8)

    Big Media is NEVER going to give Hillary credit for doing anything right. And this is still primary season.

  123. BM,

    awesome post. I think Obama thinks every man in america is as cavemaniish as him. i am writing a blog on hillary’s experience later today. two old videos have surfaced on youtube. one of them is titled
    “Hillary Clinton gets booed in Seattle 1994” . these were same “progressives” edwards and obamas in the audience that were booing her. only difference is today they need the platform to climb thier own poltical ladder.

  124. More Iowa fuel for those of you who plan to post on Iowa websites (wonkette.com/politics/obama-mama.s-gun-control/obama-let-the-hicks-have-their-guns-326909.php)

    Gun Lovers Unite! Obama does support 2nd amendment rights — as long as you live on a farm and have a gun rack in your truck. Driving through Harlan, Iowa this past weekend (wild country!), Michelle Obama apparently took a stand on gun control through urban-tinted goggles.

    Reports The Baltimore Sun: “My wife, she was traveling up, I think, in eastern Iowa, she was driving through this nice, beautiful area, going through all this farmland and hills and rivers and she said ‘Boy, it’s really pretty up here,’ but she said, ‘But you know, I can see why if I was living out here, I’d want a gun. Because, you know, 911 is going to take some time before somebody responds. You know what I mean? You know, it’s like five miles between every house.”

    Sure, that makes sense… except for the fact it works both ways: if some hick went meandering through the projects in an inner city, he would figure the same thing about 911 response and protection. Before summing it up, Obama reverted to his favorite folksy buzz phrase: Use Common Sense.

    “Use common sense. We should be able to do that, and we should be able to enforce laws that keep guns off the streets in inner cities because some unscrupulous gun dealer is, you know, letting somebody load up a van with a bunch of cheap handguns or sawed-off shotguns and dumping them and selling them for a profit in the streets.”

    True. But how is he going to enforce this? Can a President determine who has the right to bear arms based on how many gold teeth or cornfields (or cornrows) you have? How does a President decide who gets to sleep with shotguns under their beds? Because surely it’s not just the rural folk who feel threatened by monsters in the night. At least they can go on shooting things under the proud title of defense and sportsmanship; inner city residents will have to work harder at obtaining a valid gun permit, keep slinking away to the black-market back alleys, sell more candy, and love thy neighbor.

    [snip]

    Either way, Republicans might actually have to think, and at least consider voting Obama if he wins the Democratic ticket. Or, you know, not.

    Obama: My wife sees need for rural gun ownership

    [snip] Plus some really great comments from non-pundits:

    *You know, I could see how if I lived all the way out here and some Mexican family bought the Dickerson farm down the road I’d wanna poison their well water, too.

    *Yeah, those terrorists are just itching to attack eastern Iowa. You can never tell when Osama’s gonna roll out of bed and decide to take out, say, Anamosa, IA, ’cause ‘if thy right eye offends thee…’. And if he does, the loyal, shotgun-armed citizenry of Iowa will be there to blast his bomb-carriers, disguised as suspiciously tanned hitchikers, to Perdition (or at least to Cedar Rapids).

    *Doesn’t Obama see the racism in being ok with rural (read: white) guns and against urban (read: black) guns. Didn’t he get his panties in a bunch about being called articulate? I know there’s a pot/kettle/race joke here, but I don’t have the energy.

    *Using your wife’s ignorance for campaigning! Why doesn’t Obama just put the blankets and pillows and teddy bear on the living room couch and call it a night?!?

    *Typical Illinois pol. Says one thing for the city folk, I’m all for gun control. Says another for the hicks, I’m against gun control.

    *I’ve heard Obama speak. He sounds like an old white guy who’s studied tapes of MLK Jr speeches. Which is about right, really.

  125. CFR’s Peter Beinert at WaPo: “Obama’s Amnesia Problem”

    Bottom line? BO needs to keep reminding amnesiac Americans that he was right on Iraq in 2002 and HRC was wrong. Problem? Americans are focused on the “now” not the “then”.

    washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/ [space] 2007/11/27/AR2007112702029.html

  126. I was watching local news last night and there is some edwards supporter putting up flyers and signs that say “don’t vote for the bitch, don’t vote for the n****r, vote for the white guy, vote for john edwards”. I was so disgusted and thought to myself, this is only going to hurt edwards’ support. Ugh.

  127. The signs were in Ames, Iowa (ISU campus) and here in Iowa City (UI campus), which is ironic because these are college towns and tend to be very diverse compared to Iowa as a whole.

  128. If the youtube link I posted showed up, I am the one with “gangsta”-like hat in the yellow “turn up the heat shirt”.

  129. Another Washington Post Article that catches Obama in another lie:

    We have a president who chortled about the fact that he has not left the country before he was president.

    It’s very hard for us to lecture others about their economies when we have doubled the national debt during one presidential term, or during the administration of a single president.

    –Barack Obama, Foreign policy forum in Portsmouth, NH, November 27, 2007.

    It is true that George W. Bush had limited foreign travel experience prior to becoming president, but it is a myth that he had never been outside the United States. Obama was also wrong on the national debt.

    The Facts
    For a normally cautious politician, Obama can sometimes make careless mistakes. See this remark about more young black men “languishing in prison” than attending college. In this case, he may have confused Bush with former Republican House majority leader Richard K. Armey who said in July 1998 that he wasn’t much interested in foreign travel. “I’ve been to Europe once,” Armey told reporters. “I don’t need to go again.”

    George W. Bush was certainly not a great foreign traveler prior to his election as president, but he had made at least brief trips to many parts of the world (including Asia, Europe, Africa, and Latin America). Reached yesterday at the Middle East Peace Conference in Annapolis, his long-time press aide Gordon D. Johndroe provided the following list of countries visited by Bush prior to 2001 “off the top of my head.”

    China (in the 70s when his father was the US rep in Beijing)
    Japan
    Mexico
    Spain
    United Kingdom
    Ireland
    Israel

    Johndroe evidently forgot about the West African nation of the Gambia, which the younger Bush visited in 1990 representing his father at Independence Day celebrations. He made several trips to Mexico as governor of Texas, and visited the U.K. with the Young Presidents’ Organization, a group of corporate executives.

    Bush’s first experience of the Middle East came in 1998 as he was considering a run for the presidency. After visiting his daughter in Italy (Johndroe also forgot about that trip), he joined a group of other U.S. state governors in Cairo, where they met Hosni Mubarak. The group then traveled to Israel where Bush toured the West Bank in the company of Ariel Sharon, the father of the Jewish settlement policy.

    Not quite the same as traveling by bus around Kenya and going to school in Indonesia–as Obama did in his formative years–but a far cry from the caricature offered by the Illinois senator.

    During the same foreign policy conference, Obama also exaggerated the increase in the national debt under Bush. For the record, the debt stood at $5.728 trillion on January 20, 2001, on the day of Bush’s inauguration. It now stands at $9.134 trillion. As a percentage of GDP , which is probably a fairer way to look at it, the debt has risen from 58 percent when Bush took office to around 67 per cent today.

    The Pinocchio Test
    It is unclear what Obama was thinking about when he made these remarks. His spokesman, Bill Burton, emailed me this comment: “Zzzzzzz.” That may be the case, but it is hardly the way to win the heart of the Fact Checker. I forgive Obama the trillion odd dollar mistake on the size of the national debt–who knows, it may reach $11.4 trillion by the end of 2008–but to say that George W. Bush never traveled abroad prior to 2001 qualifies as “a whopper.”

    UPDATE: I received another e-mail from Bill Burton at 6:30 a.m. this morning (half an hour after this post went up), amplifying his “Zzzzz” remark of yesterday. He said that the national debt was on track to increase by 70 percent by the end of Bush’s second term. “Yes, it hasn’t quite doubled,” he conceded. “However, it’s pretty close.”

    On the matter of Bush’s foreign travel, Burton cited a June 20, 2000 interview with Hearst newspapers in which Bush, then governor of Texas, was asked whether he planned to travel abroad prior to the presidential election in November. This was his reply:

    “I should have said ‘no unequivocally,’ but I would say ‘unlikely now.’ I thought about it. I did travel abroad once. I went down to Nuevo Laredo (Mexico) and opened a bridge (with Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo). One of my prouder achievements of my governorship of Texas is all the (good) wishes from Mexico (after my) willingness to defuse the ugly race-baiting issues (and) immigrant-bashing that went on for a while.”

    The “I did travel abroad once” comment is interesting. Was Bush being deliberately philistine in overlooking his other foreign trips? Or was he referring to his official travel as governor of Texas while campaigning for the presidency? As we know, GWB sometimes mangles his words. I invite readers to do their own sleuthing, but I am declaring an amnesty on the 2000 election. This column is focused on 2008.

    I might have subtracted a Pinocchio had I received Burton’s explanation earlier but, whichever way you look at it, Obama is still still wrong.

    Link: blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/?hpid=artslot

  130. Great news on the Fla. poll. BTW, I would like to see Hillary talk to those small Iowa weeklies, if she can. I know her time is limited, though.

  131. HWC, I am hearing alot of people say Hill should get back above the fray and stop letting Obama get to her. I would like to see her be a little less reactive, at this point. What do you think?

    I think she has to gut him like a fish.

    Here’s the problem. Clearly the Georgetown Social Club is not going to hold Saint Obama up to any scrutiny. So, Clinton will have to do the dirty work herself.

  132. That is right, hwc. I defended what Hillary was doing the other day. If the last two weeks are any indication, Hillary will have to expose Obama’s hypocrisy herself. The Georgetown social club is not going to do it for her. If Hillary was involved with what Obama was doing with his PAC, every news outlet would have covered it and MSNBC would run with it 24 hours a day for the next 10 days. You hardly see anyone ever mentioning it.

    She is keeping the fight on issues, not personal character attacks, which is the way she should be doing it.

  133. hwc, I agree. BO’s been getting so many passes that he needs a good old-fashioned comeuppance.

    BTW, I’m working at expanding my SW article on BO’s campaign financing and getting it ready for a PRWatch link, which will hit a gazillion inboxes when it goes out.

    If anybody has any links to share, I’d appreciate it.

  134. mj,

    There is no dinner party in politics. Of course everything you do in political campaign is of high risk. I reject the idea you can somehow ‘stay above the fray’. That’s not going to cut it. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

    BTW, according to Rasmussen, Huckabee has finally overtaken Romney in Iowa. The latest # is

    Huckabee 28
    Romney 25

    As I said, I’m rooting for Huckabee since his victory in Iowa will certainly attract media’s fixation on democratic race.

    Looks like Rudy will benefit from Huckabee’s IA surge somewhere else.

  135. Whoosh! I’d forgotten all about this WSJ article. BO has over 150 foreign policy advisors. Impressive, you say. Why so many, I ask?

    Guess that’s how you show “strength”.

    huffingtonpost.com/2007/09/05/obama-loads-up-with-150-_n_63158.html

  136. Obama knows very well that he has the media on his side and he is taking full advantage of it.

    Consider what he did after that lousy debate performance in Vegas. He had to take the attention away from the knocks he got from Hillary and the fact that she beat him up good and proper . So that weekend, he runs with that Novak nonsense and turns it instead into a question of her character ! He takes a discredited republican columnist for his word and uses that to attack her. Now he does this knowing that the media will soak it up and parrot his own talking points and bring out the Hillary hatred that they all harbor. And suddenly no one is talking about the debate anymore and the fact that he couldnt answer the driver license question and the audience actually laughed at him.

    The media by and large is solidly against her and will do anything to promote Obama. There will be no discussion on any issue unfavorable to Obama whether it has to do with polls or PAC’s , the fact that he is ridculously inexperienced or his stupid statements in Iowa. The real reason behind promoting that Zogby poll so much is to breed the idea that she is unelectable and wishing that will translate into a loss in Iowa. The media loves Obama and he loves the media.

    Its a reality that we have to accept. Frustrating no doubt, because all the blogs that we used to frequent to shut out the the biased media have become just as hypocrytical and biased like the big media themselves. When she wins the presidency, it will be an amazing achievement considering what she has to go through everyday.

  137. There is another poll Zogby did for Judicial watch in April. Look at the loaded questions and judge what pollster.com said about him at that time.

    April 06, 2007
    Zogby, Hillary and the Judicial Watch Poll

    Today brings another controversy involving pollster John Zogby with two potential lessons, first, about a set of transparently biased and leading questions and, second, on the limits of such efforts to manipulate opinions.

    This morning, the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank tells the story of a new poll conducted by Zogby Interactive and sponsored by Judicial Watch, a group that “back in the day filed drawers full of lawsuits alleging Clinton corruption.” Milbank describes the poll as “rather loaded in its language:”

    “Some people believe that the Bill Clinton administration was corrupt,” one question begins. In another question about Hillary Clinton, every answer included the word “corrupt,” and the question was not asked about other candidates so that a comparison could be made.

    The pollster, John Zogby, defended the questions as “balanced” — a label Fitton [president of Judicial Watch] made no attempt to earn. As he presented the results yesterday, he announced that Bill Clinton’s financial conflicts of interest “make the issues of Halliburton and Dick Cheney . . . pale in comparison.”

    Let’s take a look at the first two questions:

    304. Some people believe that the Bill Clinton administration was corrupt. Whether or not you believe the Clinton administration was corrupt, how concerned are you that there will be high levels of corruption in the White House if Hillary Clinton is elected President in 2008?

    26% Very concerned
    19% Somewhat concerned
    20% Not very concerned
    33% Not at all concerned
    1% Not sure

    305. When thinking about Hillary Clinton as a politician, which of the following best describes her?

    17% Very corrupt
    25% Somewhat corrupt
    21% Not very corrupt
    30% 51% Not at all corrupt
    7% Not sure

    You can pretty much stop after the first sentence. The suggestion that “some believe the Clinton administration was corrupt” is an obvious effort to lead the respondents to the desired answer. The drumbeat of “corrupt” and “corruption” that follows – implying that the issue is not whether Clinton is corrupt but how much – makes the bias almost comic. MyDD’s Jonathan Singer has it exactly right:

    [T]he apparently unbalanced wording of the polling conducted by Zogby International belies the notion that the organization is serious about coming up with results that actually reflect the views of the American public rather than just the views of those who paid for its services. To harp on one example, beginning a question on the scruples of a politician by saying that some people believe his or her spouse was corrupt inserts such a bias to void the results of the question — and perhaps even the questions that follow. Simply put, the questions in the poll were not, as Zogby insists, “balanced.”

    But this episode also raises a second issue. How effective were these leading questions in producing the desired response? Put another way, did Judicial Watch get their money’s worth?

    Putting aside the obvious – that a 53% majority is not concerned about corruption in a Hillary Clinton White House – consider how the Zogby results compare to a set of balanced (though somewhat dated) questions about honesty and trust (via Polling Report):

    ABC News/Washington Post (May 11-15, 2006. n=1,103 adults) – Please tell me if the following statements apply to Hillary Clinton or not… She is honest and trustworthy

    52% applies
    42% does not apply
    6% unsure

    CNN/USA Today/Gallup (Aug. 5-7, 2005. n=1,004 adults) Thinking about the following characteristics and qualities, please say whether you think each applies or doesn’t apply to Hillary Clinton. How about…Is honest and trustworthy?

    53% applies
    43% does not apply
    4% unsure

    So a year (or more) ago, roughly the same percentage of Americans considered Hillary Clinton “honest and trustworthy” as expressed little or no concern about Clinton corruption in the Zogby/Judicial Watch survey. While the comparison is obviously imperfect, the lesson here may be that well developed opinions tend to be more resistant to manipulation by leading questions. If you are convinced that Hillary Clinton is honest (or dishonest), the leading language is unlikely to alter your answer either way.

    Don’t get me wrong. I am not defending the Zogby questions, which are obviously and comically biased. However, the similarity in results when compared to fairly worded questions about honesty and trust suggest that opinions toward Hillary Clinton are well developed and resist manipulation. Voters have a pretty clear sense of who Hillary Clinton is, and those opinions may be difficult for either Clinton or her foes to change.

    UPDATE: Nancy Mathiowetz, the president elect of the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) just sent out the following release concerning the Zogby/Judicial Watch poll (interests disclosed – I serve on AAPOR’s Executive Council):

    It’s always disappointing when pollsters who are internationally known and widely quoted engage in practices that are so clearly out of line with industry standards — like using loaded and biased questions. There’s no other way to describe the questions in the Zogby poll performed for Judicial Watch.

    The good news is that it did not fly under the radar — The Washington Post was quick to point out the flagrant disregard for accepted survey standardsin the poll – A number of blogs whose authors are well versed in industry best practices and standards also wrote about the poll.

    Industry standards, including the American Association for Public Opinion Research’s Best Practices , make it clear –the manner in which questions are asked as well as the response categories provided, can greatly affect the results of a survey.

    That’s why question wording and order are some of the toughest parts of designing a good survey or poll, and thoughtful practitioners will spend a significant amount of time trying to ensure that they are balanced, simple, direct and clear

    Nancy Mathiowetz
    President-elect,
    American Association for Public Opinion Research

    http://www.pollster.com/blogs/zogby_hillary_and_the_judicial.php

  138. That’s exactly how I feel, dt. Even Kos, in a comment today, again predicted Obama will win. And, the MSM and most of the big bloggers are teamed up together in this. I really do think part of that is gender. I honestly can not understand why anyone likes Obama. He’s a sanctimonious empty suit, IMO. But he’s got the blogs and the MSM on his side.

  139. Just as we know what Hillary’s up against with the media, so does her campaign. It’s an extra hurdle, to be sure, but just one of many. I believe she’s up to the task. Let kos say what he wants. I don’t care.

  140. mj,

    I don’t understand your daily ranting. I think it’s really not helpful to be obsessed with kos and big blogs…

  141. EXCELLENT find, ra1029. May I make a suggestion? TaylorMarsh has the “Hot Topics Diaries” section on the righthand side of her website where you can quote from an article like this and then comment on it. You should take this over there and post the pertinent parts of and compare it to the most recent Zogby BS. It would be extremely appropriate RIGHT NOW, as her top article is on the Zogby poll.

  142. exactly mj. For the life of me I cant understand how anyone can take a look at Obama and think he is qualified to be president in 2009. The guy talks in platitudes and can give a good speech. Thats about it.

    Just 3 years ago, he was a state senator. He gave an anti-war speech when it was not risky to take that stance,contrarary to what he may say. His record in the senate is absolutely unspectacular. He thinks his community service in Chicago is enough experience to be president. His campaign is all based on his personality. He talks of “hope”. Ok, so that means we should all be floored with that bold assertion. He talks of reaching out and bi-partisanship. Thats what Bush did in 2000 and Arnold did in CA to be elected. It is the safest and easiest position to take to hide your record and inexperience. And whats amusing is that all these hard core leftist and die-hard liberals are excited about him when he talks of bi-partisanship in the same way as his mentor Lieberman does.

    In reality, the guy will compromise to any extent and play it safe if it advances his ambitions as his senate record in IL as well as in Congress shows clearly. He has gotten so far without any noteworthy achievement to his credit because people like the way he looks and speaks. Because of that and only that.

  143. S, has anyone read about Hill’s minority education plan? I didn’t see anything in the big papers about it. I’m curious to know how it is going over. Also, Hillary weill be at saddle ranch tomorrow to talk about aids.

  144. There’s a new NH poll from Suffolk

    Clinton 34
    Obama 22
    Edwards 15
    Richardson 9

    The last poll this firm did was way back in June, which was
    Clinton 37
    Obama 19
    Edwards 9
    Richardson 9

    Basically Obama is stuck at around 20-24 range. Clinton is also flat.

  145. All NH polls in the last month or so have shown a spread of 10-15 points for her so this appears to match that. no matter how some people will try to spin even this result against her, it is good news, 6 weeks to election day. It just confirms that her support is constant and she is not “bleeding”. the haters and the media continue to delude themselves.

  146. Looks like Hillary’s support in NH hits bottom somewhere in 32-35 range. Her numbers were hitting around 40-44% when the press coverage isn’t as negative as it is today. I would not expect the coverage to improve between now and the election day. Now we know what her bottomline in NH would be. I would like to see where the bottom line and top line support for Obama has been in NH. His number seem to be ranging from 17 to 24.

  147. It’s no surprise the races in NH and Iowa are closer than the national polls. Obama is concentrating his resources there. It’s rare to win a nomination easily, unless you’re an incumbent.

  148. This is a good post from MyDD on Monday (mydd.com/story/2007/11/26/17452/048):

    Obama put on the ropes? / by sepulvedaj3,
    Mon Nov 26, 2007 at 05:45:02 PM EST

    Have to keep it short, gathering petitions in a few minutes at the Lincoln Square tree lighting event in NYC!

    Obama has stuck himself between a rock and a hard place.

    He has to respond to any questions the Clinton campaign throws at him now.

    Its a chain reaction, and he’s in the exploding end.

    1. Drivers license — Makes a big deal about it in Philly, but then in Vegas, stumbles.

    2. Overreaction to scum like Novak. He should have let it drop once the HRC campaign said they had nothing to do with it, but he kept it going, and aimed fire at Clinton…

    3. His foreign policy flub – 6-10 years old is his best experience in foreign policy? I am sure Biden, Clinton, and Richardson will hammer him on that on Dec. 10th, if the debate occurs.

    4. Health care squabble – the back and forth put him in deeper. Now mandates are bad? But he has mandates in his own plan.

    but somehow, the conversation shifted from Hillary having to answer, to Obama having to answer. And he does, which is where the double edged sword comes in. He has to be able to look tough in responding (to boost his GE credentials) but now he is on the defensive.

    Now theres the FEC leadership PAC situation. Will he answer the questions? If he doesn’t, Clinton’s campaign scores big. If he does, the back and forth will still shake his integrity.

    Whats going to happen next? What an exciting month December will be!

    Just what I think

  149. The media is pumping up Obama because he is the easist for the Pubs to defeat. We aren’t going to hear about his mob ties, or his seeding of early primary states with donations until after the election – and only then, if he gets the nomination. Then we will hear about his mob ties from now until the election. We’ll hear about his corruption. We’ll about all of that non-stop. That’s what’s going on.

    The media knows there is nothing skanky in Clinton’s past they can take her down on – so they’re going to do everything they can to get Obama the nomination. And Obama supporters, who are, uh, less than conscience much of the time until the Borg needs them, think the media CAN”T go after Obama because there is nothing there – else they would.

  150. Thanks ra1029. eriposte has been posting some of the best diaries separating the wheat from the chaff (a little Iowa/NH farm humor). He plays no favorites, just calls it like it’s written (or spoken).

    I loved the comments, though. It took less than a dozen before the Hillary haters showed up.

  151. I suspect that your suspicions are correct, particularly since I find many of the same comments and paragraphs cut and pasted here and there. If I had the time, I’d compile a favorite hits list (oooh, bad pun) and post it somewhere.

Comments are closed.