Top Leaderboard, Site wide
July 29, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


Republican Lawmakers on Strike
Paul Ryan’s New Clothes




The Sixth Extinction
War of the Whales


Truthdig Bazaar
The Republican Playbook

The Republican Playbook

By Andy Borowitz
$16.95

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Richardson Backs Obama

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Mar 21, 2008
Richardson and Obama
latime.com

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who gave up his own run at the nomination in January, is endorsing Barack Obama. The nod from the country’s only Latino governor comes at a point in the campaign when the Hispanic vote will be less of a factor.

Still, it’s good news for Obama, who has suffered through a spate of terrible news cycles. According to the L.A. Times, Obama’s campaign is planning “a series of such endorsements and announcements.”

As a former Clinton White House official, Richardson had been under pressure to support Hillary, but he said recently of his obligation to the former president: “I paid him back. Because I served well.”

Many progressives had gravitated toward Richardson, who, other than Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel, had perhaps the strongest anti-war platform. But his role as secretary of energy in the immoral imprisonment of American scientist Wen Ho Lee is a permanent stain on his record.

Updates: You can watch video of Richardson’s announcement and read up on how he almost went for Hillary and his response to the Clinton campaign’s dismissal of his endorsement here.

Also, Clinton fixture James Carville says the timing of the endorsement is appropriate, since it’s like Judas betraying Jesus.

(h/t: The Page)


Los Angeles Times:

He also ran against Obama, of course. But in a prepared statement he’ll release today, Richardson will say:

““I believe he is the kind of once-in-a-lifetime leader that can bring our nation together and restore America’s moral leadership in the world,” AP reported.

Richardson will also say, “There is no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama has the judgment and courage we need in a commander in chief when our nation’s security is on the line.”

Campaign sources indicate Obama hopes to roll out a series of such endorsements and announcements during the long run-up to the Pennsylvania primary April 22 to create a sense of momentum. There’s still former Sen. John Edwards out there and, of course, former senator, former vice president and former presidential candidate Al Gore, who’s not always had the closest relationship with his ex-boss’s wife.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Joe Sixpack, March 22, 2008 at 1:14 pm Link to this comment

I must admit you make a strong case LeeFeller. It’d sure be something to see her drop out, do some dem fundraising this fall, get a chairmanship in the senate and try to defeat McCain in four years.

What? You don’t really expect to win without her active support or the support of the millions of Hillary supporters you belittle and insult all day, every day, do you?

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 22, 2008 at 1:10 pm Link to this comment

I’ve noticed the right-wing radio nut jobs have landed on a common theme in this Post-Speech of the Millennium era we now live in. I think this will be the point used to counter Obama’s race speech. It’s not the first time I’ve heard this criticism of Obama’s political style.

He changes the subject.

That’s right. We’re all over here watching anti-American propaganda from the good Rev. Wright on YouTube and Obama gives a speech that redirects our focus onto the larger race issues. That’s fine and I applaud him for asking us to transcend race and all but what about the Trinity Church, his longtime and continued financial support of a radical preacher, just what effect did that have on Obama and what kind of judgment does that show?

We tuned into the speech to see how he was going to dig himself out of the hole no modern politician has ever been allowed to crawl out of before and he tells us we’re the ones in the hole!

Now that’s what I call a transcendent speech. This Obama guy is as hypnotic to the media and Obamabots as Tony Robbins’s teeth. He never answered the questions most Americans were asking, but instead, like any great politician, answered the questions he wanted to answer instead. Now I can report to you that right-wing radio airwaves are blazing with the unanswered questions, like:

Why did you stay a member of a church that preaches the US Government is responsible for introducing HIV to kill only the black people? (Insert all the other crazy beliefs here. Rinse and Repeat)

If you didn’t agree with the worst of Wright’s rhetoric, which at first you claimed never to have heard, then later admitted to hearing, why did you continue to attend and financially support this church?

Would Trinity have been able to create an ecommerce website that sells sermons on DVD without big money backers like you and Oprah? Oh yeah. Oprah quit that church because she felt it was too controversial.  Humph.

What role would Rev. Wright have in an Obama administration? Would Obama continue to attend Trinity while a sitting president?

Why does Obama keep calling Wright his ‘former’ pastor when his resignation doesn’t become official until sometime in April?

What sound-minded person would accept that Rev. Wright’s bigotry is the same as the private fear of a white grandmother?

Why is it when we ask nicely for answers to real questions millions of voters still have about the Wright issue we are not-so-politely told to ‘move on’ and that stuff is SO OLD! Like omigod! That’s so 15 minutes ago!

Does the Typical White person prefer Wonder Bread? (I ask simply because my doctor thinks I could use more fiber.)

If you think that one speech can put all the worms back in the can, you are sadly either naive or mistaken. Obama may be too far ahead of Hillary to lose the nomination, but he still has to fight a general election campaign. The wolves are circling the clearing. Eyes green and fangs sharp. (Oooooh! Was that too much fear mongering for you Obamabots to handle?)

The ‘Wright-wing’ has listened to the words of Rev. Wright and in doing so, has found its own voice. Good luck with that Obama.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, March 22, 2008 at 1:09 pm Link to this comment

Not for Hillary, let’s call him names, Yep, How just saying Richardson is someone who can see the hand writing on the wall.  Under the Shit that is not sticking to the wall, Hillary and her cronies, must get credit they keep trying to keep it covered up.

Obama inflames the bigots everywhere, we have seen most of it first hand right here on TD. 

Bill Clinton, is now attacking Obama saying he is not a real patriot.
Let’s get that to stick next.

Hillary should step down, she does not have a change and she would show some wisdom if she did, might even show a glint of integrity.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, March 22, 2008 at 12:58 pm Link to this comment

I have seen roach’s fly, and like a nest of hornets that are in a frenzy, the Hillary crowd is swarming like flying roaches, I wonder if they buzz.


Richardson is unimportant to the Hillary crowd,  so all this unimportant spin from the Hillary crowd is like crawling ad swarming to make it just so.

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 12:47 pm Link to this comment

I kind of lost your point in that long and rambling piece. It sort of lacked coherence.

Tou did write this that somehoe struck a chord with me.    “Imagine how boring a play would be if all the performers had to read teleprompters or pack around notes! And while few roles call for 37 minutes of running dialogue, EVERY role requires memorizing the entire play! Because there is no way performers can interact if they don’t know every cue line, and every movement in addition to their own lines and movements. And the directors notes on every page! “

Are you saying that Obama is just play acting and is not real or genuine?

Report this

By Maani, March 22, 2008 at 12:47 pm Link to this comment

Louise:

There is HUGE difference between preaching a sermon - of any length - and delivering a SPEECH.  A sermon is generally adlibbed around a small number of points, usually Scriptural, but not necessarily so.  A good preacher knows how to amplify that small number of points as s/he brings them up.  And those points are almost always on index cards or paper at the pulpit.  That is LEAGUES different from delivering a prepared, or even mostly prepared, speech which is FAR more detailed in nature.

I can speak to both of these because, yes, I have delivered a few sermons (as have all of my colleagues), and I have also delivered prepared speeches (as have many other people I know).

And since you insist on comparing apples to kangaroos, re actors, one is learned lines for which there are cues, or relatively brief soliloquies or monologues within a larger piece.  And in those few instances of truly lengthy monologues, it takes ALOT more than a day or two to memorize; Obama wrote his speech and delivered it within 72 hours.

As wel, re comedians, most stand-up comedians do perhaps 8 to 15 minutes of material, which is also relatively easy to memorize.  And for those long-form solo acts (Chris Rock, George Carlin, Lewis Black et al), again, those sets are memorized over a LONG period of time.

So, no, it would not have been possible for Obama, however talented he may be, to have memorized a VERY detailed 37-minute speech in less than 72 hours.

Peace.

Report this

By Christopher Robin, March 22, 2008 at 12:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Clintonites have gone from just sour, to sour grapes I see, yet again.

There is one large glaring difference between Hillary and Obama

Character

Report this

By Louise, March 22, 2008 at 12:39 pm Link to this comment

It’s really sad that you folks who claim to support Hillary never spend any time promoting Hillary. With supporters like you, she doesn’t need any detractors.

In fact I think you’re all frauds. I think the last thing in the world you want is Hillary Clinton for president. I think the only thing you want is to destroy Obama, so Hillary will win the nomination so you can then destroy her.

If someone cared to bother, I’m sure trolling through your posts would prove, you’ve spent next to nothing on promoting her and her positions in a positive way.

In fact, you have done such a miserable job of elevating the candidate you claim to support, most everyone here has completely lost sight of her. Shame on you. It really is sad.

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 12:38 pm Link to this comment

You are so right, Lee. Let’s just imagine for a minute if a white person said or wrote something like this:

“I am a white man. I have been an active member of the KKK. I have donated tens of thousands of dollars to this organization. Just because I am a member, I can not be held responsible for what the heads of the KKK say. That is un-American. Guilt by association is not fair. I never knew the KKK was racist. They are just like old Uncles that say crazy things. I must have been absent when they talked about racism, anyway. I am not a racist. How dare you think that. And besides my opponent is responsible for bringing this up. It never would have been the right wing doing this because they say they like me. It is all her fault. She is divisive. I am all for unity.”

We would see that for exactly what it is. But all of a sudden becasue it is Barak Obama we are supposed suspend belief and to believe that up is down and left is right and wrong is right. (Please notice I did not use ‘balck is white.’)

During the Imus controversy regarding using the phrase “nappy-headed-ho’s a while back Obama said the following:

“There’s nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude,” Obama told ABC News in an April 11 interview.” (Yet he put Rev. Wright on his Race Relations committee knowing he had made racistt remarks.)

Obama further said in this ABC interview he would never appear again on Imus’ show.

“He didn’t just cross the line,” Obama said. “He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America.”

Yet Obama allowed his daughters to hear Rev. Wright’s racist and anti-American remarks every Sunday they were in church.

Obama allowed his pastor to spew vitriol about his white mother and grandparents, while his own daughters sat there and listened to same.
This is not my America. This is not my “family values.”

What is the definition of hypocrisy again?

Report this

By d., March 22, 2008 at 12:33 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Placing your faith in leaders that have followed the norm and have not voted against criminal wars, torture, and have choosen to vote against the will of their constituencies will not help the future of our country. myspace Darren Gelbard. Accused USA of 9/11 and was tortured.

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 22, 2008 at 12:29 pm Link to this comment

I think Fox News has reported that Al Gore, in fact, invented Heinz 57 and sold the formula to foreign born heir, Mrs. John Kerry. ;->

Report this

By Louise, March 22, 2008 at 12:27 pm Link to this comment

Here we go round the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush, here we go round ...

It really doesn’t matter whether or not someone went off on a tangent against Obama’s “race” speech following my comment about Obama’s free-wheeling style, or visa versa. Although I personally believe the first to be the case, otherwise I never would have bothered with the comment.

And I wont attack Hillary, nor say anything negative about her beyond stating the simple fact she voted to authorize the attack of Iraq. I like Hillary, I just don’t think she’s the best choice to lead us out of the republican quagmire we’re all swimming in. I like Bill, and thought he was a good president. And cyrena is right, Bills style and Obama’s style are in many ways similar. Hillary’s style is not similar to either one.

But there is one thing you said, that I cant believe you said ...

“It was a 37-minute speech, and there is no way on God’s great earth that ANYONE could memorize a 37-minute speech.”

Correct me if I’m wrong [and I’m sure you will] but didn’t you say once you were a religious leader, or had a congregation, or some such? Anyone who’s ever sat through any church gathering KNOWS, if the leader, or whatever hasn’t memorized his/her speech/sermon, the congregation will promptly go to sleep!

Sometimes they last 15 minutes, sometimes they go on for hours, but they don’t get read! Well except maybe some Televangelists, but they’re frauds anyway.

Then there’s the address given at a graduation, or a funeral. Memorized. [except when given by Bush or Cheney] And that most perfect example the stage.

Imagine how boring a play would be if all the performers had to read teleprompters or pack around notes! And while few roles call for 37 minutes of running dialogue, EVERY role requires memorizing the entire play! Because there is no way performers can interact if they don’t know every cue line, and every movement in addition to their own lines and movements. And the directors notes on every page!

In short, the theater requires memorizing a couple of hours of words plus direction. And it happens every day! And an understudy has to learn the same thing, often in less than 24 hours! So, there are many ways lots of someone’s can memorize a 37 minute speech! It happens all the time!

How about that stand-up comic?

And by the way for someone - sorry cant remember who - Obama wrote that speech himself! You know what the real problem is don’t you? Mainstreammedia demands copies of speeches beforehand. And stupid campaign advisors think that’s a good idea. And Pundits rip people apart if the actual delivery varies in any way from the release. So people are forced to read. At least those who believe mainstremmedia is more important than god, life, liberty and the truth. Or, those who listen to their stupid advisers. For the most part Obama does neither. Something else that people admire.

Report this

By jbart, March 22, 2008 at 12:22 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Cyrena.
There’s a Net idea being circulated that, basically, calls for a boycott against the EXXON-MOBIL empire.  It’s a pretty simple campaign to join.  Just buy your “required” gasoline from other brands.  There are plenty out there and, with the craziness of recent pricing, what does it really matter WHO we buy gas from?  Right?  So just buy from any gas station EXCEPT EXXON-MOBIL.  I truly believe, that if enough gasoline consumers, which we all are, buy from ANY other source, there will be tremendous financial effects on that conglomerate.

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 12:19 pm Link to this comment

******I just cant understand your hang-ups on trivia, like how he does or doesn’t endorse his Reverend. Like that really matters to anyone, except maybe him and his Reverend.*******

If you cannot understand this issue and the impact it will have on a majority of voters in the General Election the there is no hope of Democrats taking back the White House in November. If you are that blind and that unknowing then there is no hope of Dems winning. In one poll I saw this week 57% of AAs found Rev. Wright’s sermons offensive.

I am providing (AGAIN) recent Rasmussen poll results. Pooh-pooh them at your peril. Obama has been branded and the Republicans will not waste a second driving that brand home in the General.

“In the week before the media frenzy over Wright, Obama and McCain were essentially tied in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll. Less than a week later, and two days after Obama’s speech, McCain had opened a seven-point lead over Obama. Significantly, by Thursday’s polling, McCain had pulled slightly ahead of Obama among unaffiliated voters. McCain also enjoys unified support from Republican voters while Obama only attracts 65% of Democratic votes at this time.
Obama’s favorable ratings have also fallen below the 50% mark since the world learned of his former Pastor. This can be seen as part of a larger trend that began shortly after Obama’s victories in the Wisconsin Primaries. At that time, just before Hillary Clinton began raising questions about her competitor, Obama was viewed favorably by 56% of voters nationwide. That had slipped to 52% just before Pastor Wright’s views became big news and to 47% just before Obama’s speech. Two days after the speech, Obama’s favorables remain at 48%.” Source Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll


*****Come on now, put your heads together and come up with some really important stuff! ******

Just did.  But it will make no difference to any Obamabot. I know that.

I wouldn’t mind in any normal Presidential election year you all wanting to piss away this election on someone who will not be able to win the General and learn the lesson of your foolishness.  I have been there and done that in 1972. But this is the most critical election of my life. I want a Dem to win because so much is at stake.

I sincerely believe that Obama cannot win. So go ahead and mock, trivialize, and name call and all the other tactics you like to use.

You are a reflection of your candidate’s character, and that is the scariest part of all of this. God help us all.

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 12:18 pm Link to this comment

******I honestly don’t know, because I didn’t notice. So I doubt he did.******

Now there is a set statements that will hold up in a court of law:

“I don’t know”

“I didn’t notice.”

“So I doubt he did.”

I rest my case. You prove my point with elegant ease. Obamabots are not paying attention at all, let alone close attention to anything their chosen one says or does. Thanks for the proof, Louise.

*******Anyway, maybe you Obama bashers need to focus on things that are really important. Like, the morning of that rally did Obama eat pokrinds ‘n’ grits, or bacon and eggs? Did Richardson eat Fajitas for breakfast, or oatmeal? Blah, blah, blah, etc., etc., etc. ******

Really, sarcasm does not become you and does not help your candidate at all.

*******And what about the really important stuff, like do they prey together, or in separate closets. *******

Prey????????? Do Barak and Michelle PREY together? Well, I never ever considered that possibility until you suggested it. Based on all of the negative insults the Obama’s have leveled at Hillary, now that you mention it, they must be doing it together. PREYING together allows you to dig up just more dirt. Double your pleasure. Double your fun. Makes so much more sense now to me know this. It was obvious all along. I don’t know how I missed that one. Thank you for pointing that out to us all !!!!!!!!

******And how do they prey? On one knee or both?******

Super sleuth, why don’t you research how they PREY.  Do let us all know. Pictures would be even better.


******I mean there is so much stuff with substance you could focus on. Stuff that really counts! I just cant understand your hang-ups on trivia, like how he does or doesn’t endorse his Reverend. Like that really matters to anyone, except maybe him and his Reverend.*****
Substance???  You say you want substance. Stuff that really counts??????  Gee. I thought that is what some of us on this site try to do all the time. But then we get put down, called names, and told that this stuff is just trivia. But once again I will try. (Awaiting put downs with baited breath.)

Here is a list of some substantive issues for me:

=Obama thinks Social Security is broken and needs fixing. I disagree.

=Obama does not support single payer health insurance. I do.

=I don’t know Obama’s REAL position on Iraq. (See Joe in Maine’s post earlier today on this thread for outstanding substantive analysis if this substantive issue.)

=A pattern of dishonesty to the American public. And I, and others here, have written of these in much depth over the last few weeks and will not do here. But a list of some of these are: Rezko, NAFTA, knowledge of Rev. Wright’s anti-American and racist remarks, says he does not take lobbyist money, to name a few. The first three he has changed his story on half a dozen times or more. The last item you can research yourself on any of the excellent web sites that track political contributions, open secrets and fact check .org are both excellent sources of info of this type. Not that I expect you to really do any really hard work and actually research this stuff. It is more fun and a lot more easy to just name call.

There are so many more and I have posted on them repeatedly and I am not going to repeat myself here.

Report this

By Maani, March 22, 2008 at 12:16 pm Link to this comment

Outraged:

“I don’t know why you and Maani are so bitter and angry…”

Where is THIS coming from?  I am neither bitter nor angry.  Never have been, never will be.  Not in my nature.  Disappointed (on occasion), yes.  Bitter, no.  Passionate, yes.  Angry, no.

I support my candidate with the same passion and rigor as Obama supporters support their candidate, and as some (like you) support no candidate.

I hardly see how that makes me “bitter and angry.”

Peace.

Report this

By Louise, March 22, 2008 at 12:15 pm Link to this comment

Lies, lies and more lies. lib is really a con ...

Report this

By cyrena, March 22, 2008 at 11:58 am Link to this comment

Bert writes…
•  Obama’s cries of racism will fall on the hard, cold, deaf hearts of Republicans. In fact, his cries of racism will only energize every later racist in the Republican party. Unfortunately the Republicans have fine tuned their racisr rhetoric since Nixon in 1972.

***********
I’m asking…when has Barack Obama ‘CRIED RACISM’? He hasn’t of course.

There we have it. Sure am glad none of my own families’ kids were never subjected to a teacher like you bert. That sort of trauma can often take years in the healing.

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 10:58 am Link to this comment

Courageous decision my foot!!!! It was blantant political pandering. Richardson wants a position in the White House. That’s all this endorsement is.

Report this

By Louise, March 22, 2008 at 10:58 am Link to this comment

Bert:

‘My fellow Americans, there is no such thing as race - we all belong to the same race - the human race’

***

Now maybe Obama did not say exactly that in those exact words, but THAT is exactly what he said. Maybe you need to go back and listen again.

I find your justification for discrediting Obama’s speech about race and religion a bit convoluted. When one is forced by attack to defend oneself, there will always be those who attack the defense. Especially those who have so vociferously led the original attack.

I think what bugs Obama bashers most is he turned his defense into an attack. An attack on prejudice.
That wasn’t s’post’ta happen!

He didn’t shrink, he didn’t cower. And he wasn’t forced to that position by Olbermann!

Personally I found Obama’s remarks to reflect a remarkable candor. As well as a great deal of wisdom and courage.

And mainstreammedia and you not withstanding, I think most folks feel the same way. Because lets face it, we all have prejudices.

And sometimes, as in my case its a deep and abiding mistrust of republicans. Which is why I always try to keep the lines of communication open between me and the republicans I know. [lotsa tongue biting there]

You guys are a hoot. You’re so busy trying to sneak into the basement, or climb in through the attic, it’s never occurred to any of you to just walk in the front door!

I’m familiar with the PBS Documentary, but thanks for the reminder. Unfortunately a lot of folks still view those findings as unproven scientific hypotheses. I’m not one of them. And apparently neither are you. Now see? Everyone can find common ground once they move beyond prejudice!
In’t life grand?

***

mensa member:

Thanks, I am deeply honored. [How much does it pay?]

However I didn’t invent Heinz 57, I’m just a carrier. [like most everybody]

Besides, I agree with Maani ...
I would never belong to any board that would have me as a member ... wink

Report this

By Maani, March 22, 2008 at 10:53 am Link to this comment

Louise:

Whether accidentally or by design, you are conflating two speeches.  The speech we have been discussing re the “teleprompter” issue was Obama’s speech on RACE - NOT his speech when Richardson endorsed him.  This debate came out of bert’s intial comment in this regard (the Obama read his race speech from a teleprompter), Cyrena’s response to bert (claiming that since “HE WROTE” the speech, it was not delivered from a teleprompter), and my response to Cyrena.

Re the race speech, every news outlet confirms that Obama used a teleprompter.  Now, if you (or Cyrena) have information that these news outlets do not, then by all means, provide it.  If not, stop being obtuse.

That said, I still don’t see what the problem is that he DID use one.  It was a 37-minute speech, and there is no way on God’s great earth that ANYONE could memorize a 37-minute speech.  And since he only read from or looked at his prepared notes twice, he clearly wasn’t reading from his notes.

Peace.

Report this

By BobZ, March 22, 2008 at 10:47 am Link to this comment

Bill Richardson broke his ties with the Clinton machine in favor of Barack Obama for two good reasons: he knows the limits of Clinton style governing and he knows that Obama can restore America’s image around the world. The Clintons like the Bush’s now represent the past. America needs to move forward and Richardson understands that - he made a courageous choice to break his ties to the Clintons and for that he is to be applauded.

Report this

By Lee, March 22, 2008 at 10:32 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Regarding Bill Richardson ... what was this
‘prominent’ proud hispanic governor’s hispanic
name, before he changed it to Richardson?

Obama talks about listening to the voters vs.
the delegates ... however, Hillary won the popular
vote in New Mexico, and yet Obama is more than
ready to have Richardson provide his ‘super deligate’
vote for Obama???

I noticed that CNN devotes much more ink to Obama
than Hillary.

ROLAND MARTIN WHITE WASHES WRIGHT & OBAMA

I’ve always felt that Roland Martin was biased toward Obama. On news programs he always adds some spin to let Obama ... and, now Wright look better. First of all ... CNN’s title of the article is ‘The Full Story’  ... huh uh ... CNN’S full story maybe. Plus, who cares if an ambassador wrote most of the ‘chickens coming home to roost’ speech. Martin makes a big thing about ‘context’ ... and, yet the ambassador’s context was much different than Wright’s ... not to mention, less emotional ... less incendiary ... and, over a period of time, not in a context of speeches that were racially explosive, divisive, anti-American (‘god damn America’... the government created AIDS to get rid of blacks ... 911 govt. conspiracy ... etc.) ... and, not after giving Louis Farrakan a lifetime achievement award ... that’s context! Personally, I don’t need Roland Martin’s INTERPRETATION ... Martin’s article doesn’t justify Obama exposing himself, and his family to Wright’s racist associations, and hate speech for over 20 years ... (another aspect of context). As eloquent a speech writer and speaker Obama is ... I think his ambition over shadows his honesty and patriotism ... and, I don’t trust him.

Report this

By lornejl, March 22, 2008 at 10:29 am Link to this comment

By lib in texas, March 22 at 9:15 am #
(166 comments total)
Re: Tiring negativity

I’m tired of negativity also so Cyrena, Louise, Aegrus, Leefeller STOP IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gee, after the wonderful last 7 plus years, how could anyone be negative ?

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 10:27 am Link to this comment

This is an endearment, Leefeller.

If it offends you I, sorry,  shall stop immediately.

Although I have to tell you my playful side and my ironic sense of humor really made me want to add ‘sh*t head at the end of that last sentence.  LOL smile

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, March 22, 2008 at 10:20 am Link to this comment

Bert,

What’s with the sweetie pie comment?  Do not recall calling you any names.

Report this

By cyrena, March 22, 2008 at 10:17 am Link to this comment

uise…what a delight!!

Your post has (again) provided me with such excellent prompts for my research! I would NEVER have thought about checking out the brand of toilet paper, or what they had for breakfast, (Laura has ham and eggs on the menu for the house brunch tomorrow, so at least the MSM knows the important stuff to pay attention to) Humm, maybe they’ll have grits too, since I’ve never known a Texas breakfast to be without them. Matter-of-fact, I think my old employee cafeteria was fined one time when they ran out of them before noon. I can’t remember why they ran out though, because there were always HUGE troughs of them anytime I dared go in and peek at the display.

Meantime, I followed the links and watched the rally. It was very exciting, and I appreciate exactly the humor and ease with which these leaders and the electorate can enjoy such events. Some folks don’t know what their missing, but they do actively CHOOSE to miss it. I’m convinced of that.

So, the teleprompter comment..first uttered by Maani and later picked up by bert, is not surprising. It was a very intentionally placed smear/dig/distortion to bash Obama, followed by an equally snide remark, (my ex likes that word, ‘snide’) of something to the effect that the speech, ‘seemed’ sincere, blah, blah.

In reality, anyone who has watched any speech or talk given by Obama knows perfectly well that he doesn’t use a teleprompter, and in many cases, not even notes. One would expect a professional lecturer (anyone whose been teaching for any length of time) to do exactly that. I think I did notice Obama refer to his notes once or twice during the speech last Tuesday, (which was over 30 minutes long) but only occasionally. I’ve heard him speak in similar settings, like Church conferences, and sometimes he has notes, and other times not. For the rallies, he doesn’t.

Ironically enough, he reminds me somewhat of some talks that I’ve attended by Bill Clinton. He is another one who can (and will) abandon prepared notes and just sit and talk, and exchange questions and answers with the audience. Now I’m not talking about campaign politics type speeches, because I’ve heard him mostly in relation to international academic type issues. Still, Bill is a smart guy, and I’ve enjoyed his lectures in the past.

So, when we get down to discussing things like this, it’s all pure subjectivity with Maani, bert, and their ilk. They don’t like him for whatever irrational, ingrained, and personal bias-based reasons, and so nothing they ever post can be interpreted with any objectivity. There’s no real thought that goes into any of it, other than a visceral hatred of the guy, and some pretty desperate measures on how to get a jab in, no matter how trite or insignificant it might be.

Such as it is with hate mongers, some being more “talented” or structured than others. I think Maani works off of a handful of templates, just switching the word placement around from time to time.

OK, let me get back to my work. See if I can find out if Hitler tied his shoes any differently than Dick Cheney does. I’m doing a compare/contrast piece on them.

Not sure I’ll find out about the potty-training though. wink

Report this

By lib in texas, March 22, 2008 at 10:15 am Link to this comment

I’m tired of negativity also so Cyrena, Louise, Aegrus, Leefeller STOP IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this

By lib in texas, March 22, 2008 at 10:11 am Link to this comment

That was a great post you hit the nail on the head.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, March 22, 2008 at 10:09 am Link to this comment

Yes, good post, if people who support a divisive person, must attack a unifier it must feel like the tilting deck of a sinking ship,  they get ugly and nasty, because their backs are against the wall and the life boats have holes in them.  Only thing is they where this way before the good ship Hillary was sinking.

Report this

By lib in texas, March 22, 2008 at 10:08 am Link to this comment

Did you know Richardson was off on vacation and flew back to endorse Obama??  Like one pundit said ” would have liked to have overheard that phone call”.
SOOOOO he hadn’t intended to endorse Obama. Guess who the vp for Obama will be !!!!!!
Hoping to stem the flow from Rev Wright.

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 10:00 am Link to this comment

You write:    “Do you think Hillary is gonna make it all better, or will you just get a ‘good feeling’ out of trashing Obama?”

No, to both questions. I don’t put all my hope in ANY politician. Politicians by definition are not to be trusted.

That is why our brilliant Founding Fathers built in so many checks and balances into our Constitution. They knew politicians; they knew men and women, and if left to their own devices they would take all power they could get and abuse the masses. But I know you know this too, so I won’t belabor the point.

I don’t get overly hyped by politicians and their campaigns. I look at it all in a more matter of fact way. I am looking to hire some one for a job. And I want to choose the best candidate, one that 1.) can win the next round of interviews (the general), and 2.) one that can run this huge beau racy. It is a pretty matter of fact exercise for me.

I don’t expect the President of the United States to fulfill all my hopes and dreams.  I do that for myself. And so far my life has been blessed, rich and wonderful and full of meaningful work where I have touched lives and helped many people, not least of which were the children I taught. It is a good feeling to know I have made a difference. I am proud of my life and of me. And I have managed to have, and still have, lots of joy for all this life has to offer.

I hope you have a wonderful and blessed Easter as well, Cyrena.  smile

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, March 22, 2008 at 9:59 am Link to this comment

In your dreams, of course the issues are important, because they are your attack and kitchen sink tools.

Why don’t you do something positive about Hillary instead of the usual divisive stuff, guess Hillary cannot approach issues in a unifying way, unless she is supporting McCain.

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 9:40 am Link to this comment

Joe in Maine - Thanks for depressing me on a beautiful, sunny, warm spring day.

Thanks for reminding me of this:  “....smart bombs that cost $200,000 each dropped by bombers that cost $1.2 Billion each.”

The saddest part of this is that this money, our tax dollars, is totally and completely gone, blown away, blown up.

If those dollars had been used instead to rebuild infrastructure, or on people for education, job taining and the like we would have received a return for our dollars, we would have received a retun on our investment that then would provide something tangible for our country.

Both the money and the bombs are gone with the wind.

I thought Republicans were better money managers.  NOT.

Report this

By Louise, March 22, 2008 at 9:38 am Link to this comment

Maani:

Just for clarification, given you believe clarity is one of your strong points. The comment I posted regarding Obama’s speaking was:

“Anyhow, if you’ve got the time, watch the endorsement at Obama’s rally, and the following news conference when they re-run on c-span. so much more informative than mainstreammedia’s release from a prepared statement.”

“Richardson’s comments came from his head and heart and were not simply read. Like when Obama speaks. So refreshing.”

***

Now, if you watched the rally and the endorsement given at the rally and the following news conference, you would know beyond any shadow of doubt, both men spoke from there heads and their hearts. They did not use teleprompters. Perhaps Richardson may have looked at notes. I honestly don’t know, because I didn’t notice. So I doubt he did.

I do remember at one point he asked Obama if he was talking to long and Obama said talk some more and everybody had a good laugh. One more thing I enjoy about watching Obama’s campaign. Those folks have a good sense of humor, and there’s always a lot of laughter. Not the kind that comes at the expense of putting the opposition down, but real humor. Something a lot of folks cant begin to understand. Which is sad.

And by the way, the vast majority of times, when Obama speaks he’s moving. He takes extemporaneous questions from the audience, occasionally pauses, but it becomes clear when he answers it was because he was carefully wording a response in his own mind. And he always gives a response. Now some might find that troubling. I find the fact that he thinks before he speaks indicative of being thoughtful and making sure he focuses on the subject at hand. And, it is refreshing. Sorry if you haven’t witnessed that.

Anyway, maybe you Obama bashers need to focus on things that are really important. Like, the morning of that rally did Obama eat pokrinds ‘n’ grits, or bacon and eggs? Did Richardson eat Fajitas for breakfast, or oatmeal? When Obama ties his shoes, does he tie the right one first, or the left? When Richardson combs his hair, does he start on the left side or the right? And how long did it take for him to grow that beard? What brand toilet paper does Obama use? And does his wife get gas? And what about the really important stuff, like do they prey together, or in separate closets. And how do they prey? On one knee or both?

I mean there is so much stuff with substance you could focus on. Stuff that really counts! I just cant understand your hang-ups on trivia, like how he does or doesn’t endorse his Reverend. Like that really matters to anyone, except maybe him and his Reverend.

Come on now, put your heads together and come up with some really important stuff!

I’m sure if you dig deep enough you can find some really damming info.

Who knows? Maybe Obama picked his nose when he was three! Or didn’t get potty trained till he was two. Now that’s important!

Real “presidential” stuff.

Report this

By Maani, March 22, 2008 at 9:27 am Link to this comment

MM:

“Louise. I have met with the board of directors ( Cyrena, mid city-mike, Aergus, Maani, Joe in Maine ) the vote was 6-0 in favor of you becoming the CEO of Heinz Corporation…You know, 57 varities…HaHaHa.”

To paraphrase Groucho Marx: I would never belong to any board that would have me as a member…LOL.

Peace.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, March 22, 2008 at 9:26 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

By Douglas Chalmers, March 22 at 12:24 am #

you are one hateful woman.

This is cyrena who has so far pretended to be a black woman with occasionally a little native American thrown in .....now presumably a man and possibly white?!?!

It is my understanding that Cyrena (still black and female) posted a “Maani-festo” (Maani like diatribe) by Frank Schaeffer… who is the white male…

I don’t know why you and Maani are so bitter and angry, as an old hand in many political movements. It is my opinion that Senator Obama is a fill-in for your candidate who was chosen shortly after the Ohio polls closed in 2004.

I see the party of Jefferson getting ready (yet again) to immolate My prediction. Hillary in the Spring, McCain (or his successor when he dies of a heart attack) in the fall.

Hillary is scum, BUT in your favor, Obama isn’t much better.  I’m not a McCain fan, and I’ve lost faith in the Republicans ability to manage the natiopnal check book, BUT the Dems are (once again) forcing me to pick between “lesser-evils”

I also believe that the racial hatred (which people seem to think is solely a thing-of-the-past) is alive and well, and that if, somehow Obama beat all the odds, and actually got to be president, he would be murdered before he got to take the oath of office.

We’re in a real mess folks, and I don’t see help arriving soon… Hope we can hold on till 2012!

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 9:20 am Link to this comment

Leefeller writes:    “Well, Wright is the the last gasp, NAFTA did not get you very far, oh and the mob connection, boy this is as good as it gets the Muck racking,..”

But the campaign is not over yet sweetie pie. You still have seven and a half long months to go.

And quite frankly, Hillary has been treating Obama with kid gloves. The Republicans and McCain will not be so kind.

Obama’s cries of racism will fall on the hard, cold, deaf hearts of Republicans. In fact, his cries of racism will only energize every later racist in the Republican party. Unfortunately the Republicans have fine tuned their racisr rhetoric since Nixon in 1972.

Then of course, the media will turn on Obama too, in the General Election because they have a hard on for McCain. Don’t for a second believe they won’t. Happens every four years.

So all these issues will not die away if and when Obama gets the nomination. They will only get louder, especially the Wright/patriotism story line.

Oh my, that was a a time bomb Obama handed to the Repulicans on a silver platter.

Report this

By bert, March 22, 2008 at 8:58 am Link to this comment

You write:      “And we all descended from somewhere, and chances are in the long genealogy of mans place on earth, we all have identical root DNA.”

From somewhere?  Chances are.

This is a proven fact now.

Read or watch the PBS documentary, “The Journey of Man,” by Spencer Wells, a genetiticist, anthropologist, and explorer. Both book and documentary chronicle Mr. Wells odyssey to African where he got the DNA evidence.

ALL human beings alive today are descended from a single man who lived in Africa 60,000-90,000 years ago.

For those if us like me who thought and believed this to be true it was exciting and thrilling to watch as Wells proved it.

This is why Obama’s race speech last week fell flat for me. I have deliberately refrained from commenting about this speech because so many people praised it so. I thought it little more than a political cover your ass speech.

If, however, Obama had said something like this, it would have been a great speech for all ages:    ‘My fellow Americans, there is no such thing as race - we all belong to the same race - the human race’.....and then he could have gone on from there.

Now that would have been transcendent. But like so much of Obama’s campaign it was another lost opportunity.

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 22, 2008 at 8:51 am Link to this comment

Courage?

Political courage you mean? Please. You’re kidding, right? It must have taken enormous political ‘courage’ for Richardson to endorse Obama. A man he believes has the nomination wrapped up and offers him the best possible future employment opportunities? According to Richardson, Omama has almost no chance of losing the nomination. Maybe if he had endorsed right after his own failed bid or at the latest before the Texas primaries. Maybe.

I’m sure you Obamabots will fall all over yourselves in applauding Richardson for his ‘courage’ today. In my mind he showed the same courage endorsing a frontrunner as Obama himself showed in giving an anti-war speech to an anti-war crowd when he wasn’t spending political capital or risking the wrath of the spiteful neo-cons.

Now if Obama had, even one time, stood up on the floor of the senate, once elected and given a ‘major speech’ to explain why he was not only opposed to the war from the start, but was from that point on voting AGAINST funding it, now that might have taken real courage. Ducking a hard decision like a vote against funding the war, a decision that might be later called ‘giving aid and comfort to the enemy’ during a future presidential run, now THAT might have been courageous. Obama was too politically savvy to vote in any way that might hurt his chances for an office he came to Washington coveting. Hope and change indeed.

How can anyone blame Hillary who represents the majority of survivor families of 9/11 from New York for voting to authorize military action when EVERYONE was being systematically lied to by an administration hell bent to invade oil rich Iraq? Ask yourself if you would have believed the classified briefings given by the intelligence community that saw what the Bushies wanted and gave them the evidence to support the desired end game? When everyone, and I do mean everyone, looked at the Bush case for war and suspected a conspiracy but couldn’t prove it without relying on the same intelligence community already compromised by political pressure from the President.

When Condi herself was on CNN scaring the hell out of us by suggesting our first proof of a rebuilt Iraqi WMD program would be a mushroom cloud over Manhattan. How could Hillary have voted any differently? When victims’ families were calling her senate office and accusing her of killing their wives and husbands all over again if she voted no? The Rethuglicans were using patriotism, nationalism and treasonous accusations to spread filth and lies at the foot of any elected official openly opposed to the war. Good thing for Obama he was still back in Illinois where the most important consideration most days was where to have lunch with his good buddy Tony. (OK. That was unfair. I’m sorry.)

So how could Hillary turn her back on her New York constituents that were urging her to hit back? It would have taken enormous political courage to not vote in favor of the use of force resolution. So she sought refuge in the hope that the threat of force would pressure Saddam to get the WMD inspectors back in. Do you blame her for stalling for more time? Damn Hillary all to hell if you feel you need to for that vote, but to equate that vote to a lack of judgment by pointing to one speech with absolutely NO political downside is far-fetched at best. To call it proof that he has better judgment is, as former President William Jefferson Clinton correctly described, a “fairy tale”.

Courage? Nope. I won’t be buying any of that. Thanks for the offer though.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, March 22, 2008 at 8:46 am Link to this comment

The sinking ship Hillary,

Let’s see, the Hillary clowns have to keep the negative spin going.  Well, Wright is the the last gasp, NAFTA did not get you very far, oh and the mob connection, boy this is as good as it gets the Muck racking, keep holding over your heads as the good ship Clinton sinks below the surface washing your so important muck over the sides. 

Obama the hatemonger, the divisive one, the attack and spin guy, yep Obama makes Hillary look like a nice person, just like her supporters. 

If Hillary won all the small states, something tells me the Hillary spin would be,  the big states are insignificant, just like Richardson.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, March 22, 2008 at 8:33 am Link to this comment

That was a weighty endorsement in my eyes.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, March 22, 2008 at 8:22 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

First you need a history lesson, then you better check your spelling:

The company’s name is EXXONMobil (as on all those red-white-blue signs even in California) Like Dan Quayle’s “potatoe” it has no “e”

Second, as Stan-Vac (back in the day) SOCONY pulled Venezuela out of the dark ages, and gave them an alternate means of funding (or they would still be picking fruit for “United”) Far from being “exploited” the Venezuelans received (as members of OPEC) the standard bid-price for a barrel of oil.  Unfortunately the government of this country has traditionally siphoned off the oil profits and used them to maintain armies, and control.

I have deep sympathy for the Venezuelan people. When I first flew in to their country with my father, over 50 years ago, we landed amidst a carpet of green forest on a grass runway where we were the only plane.  Last time(1968) I landed in Caracas, it was a Houston-size city with sprawl, strip-malls and crime.
People actually lived in the city’s hugh dumps and the dictator had soldiers in the streets to keep some semblance of order. The family we stayed with had their own private security detail.

So now Venezuela wants to go a different way. to void old contracts, and “Nationalize” the wells and Standard Oil equipment. Good, so-be-it… BUT under a just system they should have to “Buy out” of their contract like any other entity. Any other course of action invites anarchy and a dearth of investment when the “oil culture” is gone.

Report this

By Betty Martin, March 22, 2008 at 8:09 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The issue is as I see it is that Obama can’t have it both ways. Obama wants the superdelegates to vote as the voters did, but then he keeps rolling out superdelegates like Bill Richardson and Ted Kennedy whose states voted for Clinton.

It’s just like Obama tries to claim that anything Bill Clinton says is race related, but then explains away his own controversial comments as being the truth about race in America.

Obama is playing by a terrible double standard which I hope America will see for everything that it is, not a new type of politics that will bring the country together, but an incredible hypocrisy that’s tearing the country apart.

I hope you will visit my blog too at http://www.elections2008online.com. Thank you.

Report this

By Louise, March 22, 2008 at 8:08 am Link to this comment

cyrena, March 22
Re: info from Village Elder and Mother Jones
Thanks for that. Hope everyone “gets” it.

[who am I kidding?]

One day, my grandkids wanted to figure out their ancestry. Going back over each kids respective moms and dads, and the info we had about them, me and their grandpa, we came up with an interesting list.

Like I have some grandkids who are German, English, Scandinavian, African, Hispanic, Korean, Americans. And I have others who are English, German, Scandinavian, Native American, Korean Americans. And still others who are Italian, Hispanic, Scandinavian, German, English, African, Native American, Americans. And so on.

But they all look alike. Stunningly attractive and remarkably intelligent, naturally. smile In varying hues ranging from a pinkish white to a soft gold, and that classic rich tan look. And they are so much fun to hang around with, because they like each other!

I don’t remember what the form asked when my kids were born. But I do remember the last form I filled out. When I came to the line that said “race,” the first thing that popped into my head was running the 50 yard dash and I don’t do that. So next to race, I wrote NO.

Later, I mentioned this to a friend who works for Social Security. She laughed and said, in this State you’re not required to put down your race if you don’t want to. So the NO was probably seen as “None of your business!” It is pretty silly, since what you see is what you get. And if someone cant accept that, then that’s not somewhere you want to be anyway.

Now there are some who think that’s really important. I suspect they have no clue what their own ancestry is. I also suspect they might have serious self-image problems.

When you visit the Four Corners area, you notice the “native” kids playing soccer look just like the kids you saw playing soccer in South Korea. And when you visit China, you notice the elderly, bearded gentleman you’re talking to looks just like the elderly Jew you met in Brooklyn. [except for the kipa] Point being, we’re all the same. And we all descended from somewhere, and chances are in the long genealogy of mans place on earth, we all have identical root DNA. So what’s really important is what we are. Not how we look.

Unfortunately some people are so shallow, it doesn’t matter what someone is, as long as they “look” and “prey” right.

I also suspect there are folks who regularly post on this site who aren’t what they pretend to be. Because if they were, they would agree. Focusing on race and gender and religion is nothing more than favored trickery - used by mainstreammedia and dishonest politicos to control the debate!

And if there happens to be a plan in the works to fix, alter or cheat - using race and gender and religion helps convince the prejudiced the results are legit.

One thing daily amazes me. How quickly some have forgotten the outcome of the last two general elections. Well, that and how ignorant some are of the fact that they can be so easily identified by their veiled [or not] hate-speech.

So Karl Rove’ish ...

Report this

By lib in texas, March 22, 2008 at 7:59 am Link to this comment

Whoa, your saying Mensa members comments were bigoted ????  I may not agree with it all but not bigoted. It is predicted that the minorities will be the majority in the coming years.
Richardson is a snake backing Obama cause he wants a position.
FUNNY HOW YOU AND CYRENA TO NAME A FEW HOLLER BIGOT WHEN IT SUITS YOU, BUT REV WRIGHT RACIST. NAH !!!
Theres a newly established dialog on race???? When did that happened, after Obamas speech.
Clearly you and Cyrena fall into the Rev Wright category.  Nothing you say is racist but if you don’t agree with someone they are some how racist.

Report this

By Maani, March 22, 2008 at 6:38 am Link to this comment

Cyrena:

“Why for instance, would you claim, (as has Maani) that Obama read the speech that HE WROTE, from a teleprompter?”

You are either extremely uninformed or hopelessly naive.  It was reported by almost every media source that Obama read the majority of the speech from teleprompter screens to his left and right; and his eye and body movements make this quite clear.

There is nothing “negative” about this, and has nothing to do with who wrote the speech; it is standard procedure, especially for lengthy speeches.  A teleprompter simply makes it easier for a person to deliver his/her speech without constantly looking down at prepared notes.  Yes, he did have some notes.  But he only referred to them directly twice; the rest was on the teleprompters.

Why is this such an issue for you?

Re your comment that “The State Department under the ‘guidance’ of Condi the Rice is yet another fallen institution of our once semi-great government,” you cite the Exxon-Chavez matter, and of course this is a good call.  But it was also under Rice’s tenure that there were breaches of the passport info of ALL THREE candidates: Hillary, Obama and McCain.  The NYT editorial today is fairly scathing in this regard:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/opinion/22sat1.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=opinion&pagewanted=print

Peace.

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 22, 2008 at 5:35 am Link to this comment

By cyrena, March 21 at 5:30 pm #
(3134 comments total)

Re: Re: I Second Joe in Maine
It’s worse than spin Aegrus. It’s mendacity and treachery…willful perfidy.

men·dac·i·ty     /mɛnˈdæsɪti/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[men-das-i-tee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -ties for 2. 1. the quality of being mendacious; untruthfulness; tendency to lie. 

treach·er·y     /ˈtrɛtʃəri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[trech-uh-ree] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -er·ies. 1. violation of faith; betrayal of trust; treason.

perfidy \PUR-fuh-dee\, noun:
The act of violating faith or allegiance; violation of a promise or vow; faithlessness; treachery.

I had to look these words up in the dictionary to make sure I knew what I was being accused of. We don’t use big words like perfidy ‘round these parts. They don’t come in very handy for us, but seem to be a useful tool of the elite members of the Dreamcatchers and Rainbows Wing of our democratic party.

Hey just because I happen to prefer a different candidate doesn’t mean I am an untruthful, trecherous or treasonous man. (OK maybe treason.) When you belittle the other person in a debate by questioning his personal qualities fall into the rhelm of the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam. These are very useful and effective tools of the Obamabot. Notice how a losing arguement quickly disolves into a personal attack. Not unlike a child that resorts saying, “Well! Well! Umm you’re a STUPIDHEAD!” Yeah. I’m a stupidhead. Use all the $20 words you want. You still can’t win your arguement without falling back on “Hope” and “Change” and the other political filler that asks us to suspend disbelief and expect a miracle because you want one so badly.

Good luck with that, but I’m not playing.

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 22, 2008 at 4:04 am Link to this comment

Is there any doubt in anyone’s mind that the oil companies got the very best return on investment for any presidency in history? There is so much money involved between our neocon game admisistration and the oil producers it means our government will say or do anything to promote that single agenda. Like invade ‘Terrorist’ ‘evil’ countries in order to bring them ‘freedom’ from their oil supply. The reason Bush and McCain want to stay in Iraq for 100 years has NEVER been about terrorists, it’ll just take that long to remove all the black gold.

9/11 gave the Bushies a way to enrich themselves and all their business associates. First they destroyed the country of Iraq with smart bombs that cost $200,000 each dropped by bombers that cost $1.2 Billion each. When the dust settled they awarded no-bid contracts to their friends (no europeans need apply) to provide private security so that your real intentions can be hidden. More friendly corporations come in to rebuild the infastructures for electricity, telecommunications and transportation. Install a puppet government to bring ‘democracy’ you can tout and more importantly the corporate protective legitimacy of soverenty Prety soon you got a whole new country to rape the resources from. Rinse and repeat with the other Axis of Evil nations.

Exxon set an annual profit record by earning $40.61 billion last year - or nearly $1,300 per second in 2007. That exceeded its previous record of $39.5 billion in 2006. Any doubt the ‘surge’ is working?

My heads gonna explode.

Why did you have to bring this up Cyrena???

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 22, 2008 at 3:43 am Link to this comment

Hey Bert - She was using an offical Obama talking point. Directly off the conference call. When asked about Wright in any way, spokesmen and surrogates are to respond with the question, “Are you still talking about that?” as if to imply that everyone has moved on. While it may be true that the most friendly of media outlets, MSNBC has officially moved on as of 6PM eastern last night when I heard the following:

David Gregory: “Obama used the phrase ‘typical white person’ to describe his grandmother.”

Ms. Williams: “Oh but you know, he sounded so tired.”

Yeah. TIRED! The fact that he insulted all whites at a time when he promised to help the country heal from racism is being excused by a lack of sleep.
Ahhh. OK. What time did Don Imus get up the morning he used a racial slur trying to be funny? 3:30AM? No one ever tried to give him a pass with the ‘Tired” excuse. I’ve never, ever seen a politician get a pass for anything that even remotely sounded racist. Remember McCacca or whatever? OK That guy was a tool, but still! Bert can you imagine if Hillary had been caught giving $20,000 a year to any organization that sold videos that included the N word in any context still being a viable candidate today? “Are you still talking about that?” Indeed.

MSNBC and CNN have ‘moved on’ but just a quick glance at FOX News and a few minutes with my car radio yesterday convinces me that those who liked Obama before the Wright flap still, by and large adore him. Those who used to be indifferent or disliked Obama are now fully engaged and are not ready to move on. The polls show drops in all but his core groups of voters. This negitive attention will last through the election, it sounds like. Those who thought Obama would sneak past the sleeping bear of right-wing radio were wrong. It’s ugly and getting uglier on the airwaves.

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 22, 2008 at 3:21 am Link to this comment

Yup. I think he believes that to be the case. I don’t think Obama would have been tempted to make any back room administration job promises at a time when his campaign desperately needed a boost. Do you?

It’s clear that both Richardson and Edwards were holding out for the promise of a very good job. Looks like Richardson got his.

Report this

By cyrena, March 22, 2008 at 1:59 am Link to this comment

Couldn’t think of anything original eh Chalmers? But then, you never do.

Just FYI, there’s no such thing as ‘a little Native American thrown in.’

Now is there ever a time when you don’t include a comment that makes some reference to someones race? ANYONE’S race?

Got any idea how sane people might perceive that?

No, you wouldn’t.

Still, if any one were to make even a cursory examination of all of your posts over these past years, (like the FBI or the CIA) and you weren’t hiding out so far away in your housecoat/mummu and pink haur curlers, they’d snatch your ass up and lock you away to prevent any further danger to society.

Report this

By cyrena, March 22, 2008 at 1:50 am Link to this comment

The Village Elder posted this link on another thread. I thought it would be good reading material for those of you who like to discuss ministers in terms of political associations.
*****
Obama’s Minister Committed “Treason” But When My Father Said the Same Thing He Was a Republican Hero
By Frank Schaeffer

When Senator Obama’s preacher thundered about racism and injustice Obama suffered smear-by-association. But when my late father—Religious Right leader Francis Schaeffer—denounced America and even called for the violent overthrow of the US government, he was invited to lunch with presidents Ford, Reagan and Bush, Sr.

Every Sunday thousands of right wing white preachers (following in my father’s footsteps) rail against America’s sins from tens of thousands of pulpits.

They tell us that America is complicit in the “murder of the unborn,” has become “Sodom” by coddling gays, and that our public schools are sinful places full of evolutionists and sex educators hell-bent on corrupting children. They say, as my dad often did, that we are, “under the judgment of God.” They call America evil and warn of immanent destruction. By comparison Obama’s minister’s shouted “controversial” comments were mild. All he said was that God should damn America for our racism and violence and that no one had ever used the N-word about Hillary Clinton.

Dad and I were amongst the founders of the Religious right. In the 1970s and 1980s, while Dad and I crisscrossed America denouncing our nation’s sins instead of getting in trouble we became darlings of the Republican Party. (This was while I was my father’s sidekick before I dropped out of the evangelical movement altogether.) We were rewarded for our “stand” by people such as Congressman Jack Kemp, the Fords, Reagan and the Bush family. The top Republican leadership depended on preachers and agitators like us to energize their rank and file. No one called us un-American.

Consider a few passages from my father’s immensely influential America-bashing book A Christian Manifesto. It sailed under the radar of the major media who, back when it was published in 1980, were not paying particular attention to best-selling religious books. Nevertheless it sold more than a million copies.

More here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/obamas-minister-committe_b_91774.html

When you’re done, don’t forget the best on Hillary’s fundamentalist ties.

Outraged already posted this (the original info from a piece at “Mother Jones” back in September) on another thread. But, seems like bert and a few others must have missed it. (That is unless they too are fundamentalists, who don’t seem to have a problem with hate preaching ministers as long as they’re white and repuglican).
*****
Hillary’s Ties to Religious Fundamentalists
By Barbara Ehrenreich, Barbaraehrenreich.com. Posted March 20, 2008.

When it comes to unsavory religious affiliations, Hillary Clinton is a lot more vulnerable than Barack Obama.

There’s a reason why Hillary Clinton has remained relatively silent during the flap over intemperate remarks by Barack Obama’s former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. When it comes to unsavory religious affiliations, she’s a lot more vulnerable than Obama.

http://www.alternet.org/election08/80248/

Toodles…

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, March 22, 2008 at 1:24 am Link to this comment

This is cyrena who has so far pretended to be a black woman with occasionally a little native American thrown in .....now presumably a man and possibly white?!?!

Report this

By cyrena, March 22, 2008 at 12:04 am Link to this comment

Well, I was gonna post this earlier, since I suppose this is as good a thread as any. The topic hasn’t been addressed by truthdig, but I thought it was kind of relevant, especially in light of any attempts to improve our standing in the world.

It also gave me a chuckle. (couldn’t help it) The State Department under the ‘guidance’ of Condi the Rice is yet another fallen institution of our once semi-great government.

This is from the Largest Majority,


“Exxon Loses Venezuelan Asset Freeze and Ordered to Pay Compensation

Venezuelan President and all around badass Hugo Chavez was awarded a complete victory over the largest oil company in the world by a British judge. As BoRev reported Tuesday:

This morning a judge tossed Exxon Mobile’s $12 billion asset freeze against Venezuela out of court, on the grounds that it was stupid. The U.S. State Department, you may remember, loudly supported Exxon in the case, which was probably the kiss of death for it in the first place.

The judge has also ordered Exxon to pay for Venezuela’s state oil company’s legal costs and compensation for damages. The oil giant secured $12 billion in freezes on Venezuela’s state oil company’s assets last month, and had a US court freeze $300 million in Venezuelan assets in a US bank. Exxon says the London ruling will not affect these orders, though Venezuela’s Energy Minister disagrees. Chavez himself has called the US measures “legal terrorism” sponsored by his enemies in Washington.

http://www.jwharrison.com/blog/2008/03/20/exxon-loses-venezuelan-asset-freeze-and-ordered-to-pay-compensation/

Original source:

http://uk.reuters.com/articlePrint?articleId=UKL188568920080318

I’m still laughing about the UK court throwing it out because…it was STUPID! (I have no idea if that was the actual legal wording).

Meantime, there’s a reason why the State Department was so in favor of this…‘legal terrorism’ as Hugo Chavez calls it…

Condi the Rice is also primary ‘owner’ of Exxon-Mobile.

Well, maybe ‘primary’ owner/stockholder is a bit of an exaggeration. Still, she was on the Executive Board of Directors for many years until she had to resign (at least publicly) to join the White House.
So, Exxon-Mobile has been terrorizing the Venezuelans, with help from the State Department, which has now blown up in their faces.

I think we should boycott Exxon-Mobile, just to make sure they get the message. Acts of terror (legal or otherwise) against any persons or entities, (foreign or domestic) will not be tolerated.

Report this

By cyrena, March 21, 2008 at 11:09 pm Link to this comment

Louise,

Thanks for breaking this down, for those who may not have been aware:

•  “By the way folks, Latino is a word relating to someone who comes from Latin America, generally implies a racial definition as in “appearance” and is often used as a “label.” While Hispanic refers to a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American or any other Spanish culture or origin, [including Spain and Portugal] regardless of race.”..

ALL of the Hispanics that I know…REGARDLESS of their RACE, prefer to be called Hispanic, and they’ve made that clear.

Curiously, (and I only just thought about this again, after many years) there is a ‘box mark’ yes/no question on birth certificates issued in Texas. (I lived there at the time that I delivered my daughter) that asks if the child is of “Hispanic descent”. Now, for whatever the reasons, I doubt if they much cared about WHITE Hispanics from Spain, Portugal, or even white Hispanics from Mexico.

I don’t know why I think that. I do remember though, that her father and I were very surprised to find the question on the birth certificate. (or…maybe only I was, since he had an older daughter that was also born in Texas, so maybe he’d seen it before, and didn’t remember or pay any attention to it at the time.)

I also know that no such question is on the California birth certificate. Does anyone know of any other state that specifically questions the applicability of ‘Hispanic descent’?

Just curious.

Report this

By cyrena, March 21, 2008 at 10:45 pm Link to this comment

Bert, you are one hateful woman.

Why do you lie so much about so many things that are so easily verified?

Why for instance, would you claim, (as has Maani) that Obama read the speech that HE WROTE, from a teleprompter? It’s an incredibly petty thing to begin with, but it’s such an obvious falsehood, that only a severely psychotic person would do something like this.

Why do you have so much hate? You’re not the ONLY bitter and hateful person posting here, but you’re sure among the top 10…

Such misery and bitterness. In another setting, I could actually feel sorry for you, but yours is the type of hate that can and often does affect others.

That is even more likely to happen in a society as depressed as ours is now, as we get closer and closer to a dictatorship, and more and more people become disenfranchised.

Are you one of them? Have you lost all that you ever thought you had? Is your whole life looking like a waste? One that you have nothing to show for? Do you think Hillary is gonna make it all better, or will you just get a ‘good feeling’ out of trashing Obama?

You and Maani and Douglas should form a club. Maybe talk among each other and wallow in your psychosis together. Spare the rest of us from the terror of your hateful rantings and attacks.

Happy Easter by the way.

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 9:33 pm Link to this comment

Brilliant comment and come back !!!!!!!!

And well deserved I might add.

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 9:30 pm Link to this comment

Douglas Chalmers, I am glad you said this:    “Accusing others of being divisive, Obama’s own unity is still seriously in question as he never made mention of the Democrats, a party which he supposedly represents, while continuing his own one-man campaign solely for his own sake regardless of the cost to party unity or final chances in the election.”

Very true - he “supposedly represents” the Democrats yet he actively goes out and asks for Republicans and Independents to PLAY Democrat for a Day in the primary and vote for him. (I’m not really a Democrat. I just play one for Obama.) He has paid TV ads instructing folks in PA how to do this.

He has actually won most of his DEMOCRATIC delegates with REPUBLICAN votes. This is shameful.

Them there is the disenfranchising of Michigan Democratic voters. And why is this?  Well it is because Obama wanted REPUBLICANS to be able to vote in the DEMOCRATIC primary. Knew he couldn’t win without them.

I find it horrendously ironic that a black man would let any voter become disenfranchised.

But Obama will use any tactic to win.

So much for hope and unity.

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 9:18 pm Link to this comment

******Are you guys still fixated on Wright?******

Yes. I think it very important to be fully briefed on the issue Republicans will make the Numero Uno issue in the General Election. Know thy enemy and all that.


*****Because the democrats have got to stop the self-destructive negativism this campaign is becoming. Because Obama is someone who moves beyond the negative.*****

Yeah. Sure. You got a bridge to sell me in the Sahara, too?

Obama is the one who has run a very negative campaign. He has repeatedly run false radio and print ads that have been debunked by non-partisan Anneburg FactCheck.org and as well as by other experts.

Even though McCain and Clinton have had their passport info compromised, Obama was the only one to make it public becasue he was trying to make Hilalry look bad and divert attention away form his dropping poll numbers after the Wright controversy.

Then there is the four page “race card” memo written by a South Carolina staffer listing quotes that could be used to make Hillary appear racist. For how this tactic is playing over seas in Great Britain click on the Times On Line link below:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/alice_miles/article3192712.ece

Yes, you are right when you say Obama moves beyond the negative, as long as by that you mean HE LIES to move beyond anything negative about him so that he can divert attention away from him and fool his adoring throngs.

For instance, how many times did he lie that an advisor told the Canadian government his pronouncements on NAFTA was only political posturing before the Canadian memo was actually discovered and made public. I have posted those lies with quotes and sources on this site previously. Perchance you missed it. It you want, hon, I can repost it for your benefit.

Then of course there were all the denials he made about never hearing any of Rev. Wright’s more inflammatory words which he admitted in his speech on race that…..well. Yes…....after all he had been in church and heard words like that.

His campaign also said that Clinton’s campaign has leaked the picture of Obama in the Somali dress. Well, that too was debunked when it was discovered that the picture had originally been published by the National Enquirer a month and half prior to it being on Drudge.

When it is convenient for Obama he plays the race card to maximize his black vote. What a cynical use of race.

I for one moment do not believe that Barak Obama is a racist, but damn he and his followers sure do know how to play the race card.

********Obama’s campaign is planning “a series of such endorsements and announcements.” [negative, because it implies Obama is desperately seeking endorsements. He’s not.******

Just like he hasn’t been actively seeking super delegate votes? Just like he and his campaign and his supporters haven’t been calling and harassing these super delegates. The man is m and so driven by desiring power it is sickening.

******Richardson’s comments came from his head and heart and were not simply read. Like when Obama speaks. So refreshing. ******

Oh you mean like when he read his race speech from a teleprompter thus week? Or when he unn’s and uuhhh’s his way past difficult questions from the press. Or like how is always saying in debates, “I agree with what Hillary just said.”

Holy crap, give me a break lady !!!!!!!!

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 7:54 pm Link to this comment

So much for democracy.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, March 21, 2008 at 7:48 pm Link to this comment

Its only splitting the Latino vote - which is basically already split, uhh. He won’t get the Asian vote, though…....

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, March 21, 2008 at 7:46 pm Link to this comment

Which do you mean, Aegrus? Rev. Wright’s smearing of white women - or Obama’s acceptance of that?

Report this

By lornejl, March 21, 2008 at 7:22 pm Link to this comment

Super Delegates should only be able to vote for Super Man.

Report this

By Maani, March 21, 2008 at 7:16 pm Link to this comment

For those who are keeping score:

OBAMA CAMP:

Senator Barack Obama (candidate): CFR

Michelle Obama (wife): CFR

Zbigniew Brzezinski (top foreign policy advisor): CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg

Austen Goolsbee (top economic advisor): Skull & Bones

Senator Jay Rockefeller (endorser and campaigning for): CFR, Trilateral, Bilderberg

Governor Bill Richardson (endorser and campaigning for): CFR, Bilderberg

Professor Joseph Nye (Obama teacher at Harvard, campaigning for): CFR, Trilateral

HILLARY CAMP:

Senator Hillary Clinton (candidate): CFR, Bilderberg

President Bill Clinton (husband): CFR, Bilderberg, Trilateral

Madeleine Albright (top foreign policy advisor): CFR

Robert Rubin (top economic advisor): CFR

Gen. Wesley Clark (endorser, campaigning for: CFR, Bilderberg

Report this

By Louise, March 21, 2008 at 7:06 pm Link to this comment

Holy Cru-moly!
Are you guys still fixated on Wright?
Cripes, move on already!

In the two’s speeches today a couple of interesting points were made.

First that Richardson had decided more than a week ago to throw his support behind Obama. Because he’s the best hope for the American people to come together and work to rebuild from the damage done. Because the democrats have got to stop the self-destructive negativism this campaign is becoming. Because Obama is someone who moves beyond the negative.

And because he’s just a great guy. And a whole lot of other good reasons.

He related an incident in one of the debates when Obama could have thrown him under the bus, but helped him instead.

Later in a news conference he said he watched the faces in the crowd and knew why people believed in Obama. Why he believed in Obama. And both of them dismissed the predictable poo-poos from mainstreammedia. [Not speaking of the press in that news conference in Portland, who were pretty cool. But hey, it’s Portland Oregon!]

Speaking of mainstreammedia, I always find it interesting how they give equal time and fair and balanced reporting. Like:

“New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who gave up his own run at the nomination in January, is endorsing Barack Obama. [positive] The nod from the country’s only Latino governor comes at a point in the campaign when the Hispanic vote will be less of a factor. [negative]

Still, it’s good news for Obama, [positive] who has suffered through a spate of terrible news cycles. [negative] According to the L.A. Times, Obama’s campaign is planning “a series of such endorsements and announcements.” [negative, because it implies Obama is desperately seeking endorsements. He’s not. He made it clear in the news conference, while he welcomes support and endorsement, he has a strong lead in delegate numbers.]

Many progressives had gravitated toward Richardson, who, other than Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel, had perhaps the strongest anti-war platform. [positive]  But his role as secretary of energy in the immoral imprisonment of American scientist Wen Ho Lee is a permanent stain on his record. [negative. And note a clear implication of wrong-doing without any details. That’s just so mainstreammedia!]

***

By the way, Richardson spoke with Hillary prior to his going public. She wasn’t thrilled, but at the same time understands no-one should be required to support her because of Bill. A very sound awareness many of her supporters clearly lack. And he reassured us he and the Clintons, whom he respects and admires, remain good friends.

Anyhow, if you’ve got the time, watch the endorsement at Obama’s rally, and the following news conference when they re-run on c-span. so much more informative than mainstreammedia’s release from a prepared statement.

Richardson’s comments came from his head and heart and were not simply read. Like when Obama speaks. So refreshing.

By the way folks, Latino is a word relating to someone who comes from Latin America, generally implies a racial definition as in “appearance” and is often used as a “label.” While Hispanic refers to a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American or any other Spanish culture or origin, [including Spain and Portugal] regardless of race.

Most Hispanics don’t like being called Latinos. It’s a bit of an insult. Kinda like introducing two friends to another friend by saying, “This is Joe, he’s black. And this is Bill, he’s white.” Duh ...

I suspect Richardson and Obama know that.

Report this

By cyrena, March 21, 2008 at 6:30 pm Link to this comment

It’s worse than spin Aegrus. It’s mendacity and treachery…willful perfidy.

Report this

By lib in texas, March 21, 2008 at 5:47 pm Link to this comment

This is back to Rev Wright and his hate whites, hate America sermons.
http://www.ATLAH.org is another black church (group, what ever)that is raging against Obama.  Let me tell you first of all I don’t agree with it either, but, I’ll bet those defending Wrights hatred will call this hate against Obama. Reprehensible etc.

Report this

By lib in texas, March 21, 2008 at 5:34 pm Link to this comment

Latino’s favor Hillary over Bill.  Doesn’t say much for Him.

Report this

By lib in texas, March 21, 2008 at 5:23 pm Link to this comment

I just have one thing to say after I heard just a portion of Richardsons speech.  Obama will unite us???  The way I see it he has divided us !!!!! Just read the posts on truthdig !!!!!

Why should Hillary drop out??  Obama is doing a good job of writing himself off.
They say Hillary doesn’t have a chance, no way she can win, that is propaganda to keep people from voting. Don’t listen to that get out and vote. 
More later after I get over Richardson mealy mouthed speech! Yuck !!

Report this

By Bettym47, March 21, 2008 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Yes. Douglas. I agree with you. I don’t think Obama is the hope and change we need. He’s same old dirty politics. I hope the good, hard working people of Pennsylvania vote against Obama in huge numbers. The press adores Obama. They starting showing the stories against Obama only once he had a comfortable delegate lead.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, March 21, 2008 at 3:49 pm Link to this comment

“The reason people were drawn to Barack Obama was because he was suppose to be a new type of candidate where he would work with people of all types and not be polarizing. He was going to rise above negative politics…”  Obama’s incredible hypocrisy http://www.elections2008online.com

Obama had endorsed the bigoted and racist sermons of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright for 20 years. One can deduce that the reason he did so,  Bettym47, was that he harbored a hatred or at least an abiding resentment of his white mother and/or white grandmother (who he mentioned in his recent speech as having “cringed” from her comments).

It is quite obvious that Obama had accepted Wright’s malicious attacks on Hillary Clinton for quite some time. The fact that it inferred that all (rich) white women were not safe as a result of such incitement never seems to have bothered him, uhh. Ironically, Wright is only a quarter black himself and has become psychotic in his repudiations of his own dominant white ancestry.

Report this

By Margaret Currey, March 21, 2008 at 2:01 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I think Hillary would make a great president, Obama will make a great president, since I like both either one winning will make me happy.

Since my state has their primary in May, the choice will be determined after the Pennsylvania primary or shortley thereafter.

I am a voter who wish that they could be on the same ticket, but now that Richardson has endorsed Obama the ticket that would be great will be Obama/Richardson.

There has been a comment that Richardson has made mistakes, but no candidate is mistake proof.

Let the Democrats win in November!

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, March 21, 2008 at 2:00 pm Link to this comment

New Mexico Governor endorses Obama… cites his Tuesday address on race: “He appealed to the best in us…. As a Hispanic American I was particularly touched by his words.”

I agree that Obama’s speech was courageous but not nearly as much as Reverend Wright’s sermon on God Damn the USA was back in 2003 at the time of the second US invasion of Iraq. It is a typical politician’s speech, though, working both sides of the crowd and effectively resolving only his own pet issues. Nevertheless, some of Wright’s sermons are blatantly racist and sexist. Jeremiah Wright - Hillary Clinton ain’t never been called… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAYe7MT5BxM


But Obama also couldn’t bring himself to once directly say “Latino” even when referring to “the immigrant struggling to feed his family….”. Hispanics only got a look-in at the end very briefly after everyone else had been mentioned. Was that because of black-Hispanic rivalries or because he wanted to use “illegal immigrants” (who he did mention) as a whipping post? Too bad about any other ethnic minorioties, uhh.

Accusing others of being divisive,  Obama’s own unity is still seriously in question as he never made mention of the Democrats, a party which he supposedly represents, while continuing his own one-man campaign solely for his own sake regardless of the cost to party unity or final chances in the election. The issue of race and of Rev. Wright’s sermons have been turned to his advantage despite the final cost.

Latinos would also remember that California and Texas were once theirs and were taken from them and that they were made to be second-class citizens. Obama has not remembered any of that history, either. Neither would they welcome Obama’s attitudes towards their own community’s Catholic priests who are far more respected than the Irish Catholic church in America.

“As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me….. he strengthened my faith” , Obama said of his preacher as and when it suited him to make such reference but still the main point of his speech was to denounce and to negatively criticize the words of the brave and outspoken Rev. Wright once those words did not suit Mr. Obama’s precious and utterly selfish presidential campaign.

Still smearing his preacher, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, its now alright to “strongly disagree” with one’s spiritual leaders to the point of denouncing them for challenging the worthlessness of the great illusion of the American dream if one wants to manipulate that false dream to one’s own political advantage. Is that really the kind of man you would want ‘answering the phone at 3am’?

Strange that it was the stories of the Old Testamant but not of Jesus which inspired Barack Obama for the last 20 years. Those are not the ideals that Christianity is made of despite the ravings of the religious fundamentalists. It therefore seems rather incongrous that Obama should mention “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” but conveniently ignore the plight of Christian Arabs in Palestine and Lebanon.

But, of course, “stalwart allies like Israel” must always be catered to first and foremost - even in speeches about African Americans. Perhaps that was one thing that the Rev. Wright forgot to inform Obama about, eh? Nevertheless, it was “the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam” which no doubt included the democratically elected HAMAS government and the Hezbollah Lebanese anti-Zionist resistance movement that had to be described as the ever-present ‘evil’ for the sake of Obama’s AIPAC supporters.

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 1:53 pm Link to this comment

Your link is as empty a promise as is Obana’s hope campaign. All I found at this link is a web page for spartan internet. No link to Obama.

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 1:46 pm Link to this comment

“.....any chance that Richardson endorsed Obama because he honestly believes that Obama would make a great president?”

OF Obama gets elected president. You have put the cart before the horse. I wonder why Richardson made his endorsement now, after the Wright controversy and falling poll numbers and falling favorability numbers. Not well thought out.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, March 21, 2008 at 1:35 pm Link to this comment

Gore has something to make up for with his loss as the nominee in 2001, uhh. A previous VP and the first lady of the same former president should make an interesting team…...

Being VP is all he now deserves after failing to fight conclusively for the presidency last time. Advocating climate change is not enough and the real opportunity is to help make positive change in Washington.

Report this

By Aegrus, March 21, 2008 at 1:23 pm Link to this comment

Polls ebb and flow at your spit in the wind. This story will fall, and you’re fear of Obama being branded is not based in fact. This is all very new, and you don’t know what will happen in the coming weeks to change the perception. Believe me, this is far from over.

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 1:18 pm Link to this comment

I know I am spitting in the wind here. And I know my posts will fall on deaf ears. Nevertheless -

Joe in Maine wrote:    “Your candidate has a 500 foot gash in his side now and is taking on a lot of water. All the bilge pumping in the world won’t bring the Reagan Dems and Indies back. I wouldn’t count on the good people of MI and FL or Hillary supporters (49% of your DEM base) to save your campaign either.”

The damage is already done. Whether it is fatal and can be corrected, I don’t know. But I seriously doubt it. Obama is branded now. And once branded it is hard to turn around. Just as the creators of New Coke discovered in 1985.

From today’s Ramussen Daily Tracking poll:  BOTH Michigan and Ohio moved from the ‘likely’ Democrat category to ‘toss up.’

Even more troubling is this from the Ramussen Report:  “On Friday, Obama’s favorable ratings remain little changed from recent days—48% favorable, 50% unfavorable. Before the Pastor Problem became big news, Obama was viewed favorably by 52%. One month ago, he was viewed favorably by 56%. The number with a Very Unfavorable opinion of Obama has increased from 26% a week ago to 33% today.”

Joe in Maine’s analogy of the Titanic is apt indeed.

Report this

By cyrena, March 21, 2008 at 12:35 pm Link to this comment

On Edwards, I’m still not certain. On Gore, my guess is definitely on Obama.

I’d like to think that Edwards too, would see the light. His own campaign focused on principles that are totally in line with Obama, which would of course make them totally out of line with the Repug-Dem Hillary.

That’s what people like bert and joe don’t get. Hillary is a repuglican. Repuglicans will support McCain. Democrats with democratic principles who hope to get the party refocused on democratic principles will vote for Obama. Americans who don’t much care about party associations, and just want to survive another decade or better, will also vote for Obama, since he’s the only visible chance of that happening.

That is NOT to say that among America’s 300 million plus population, there are not at least a handful (probably more) people qualified to do the job. The only one currently running for it however, is Barack Obama.

Report this

By Aegrus, March 21, 2008 at 11:52 am Link to this comment

It’s not courageous to perpetuate an exaggeration taken out of context. It’s spin.

Report this

By cyrena, March 21, 2008 at 11:33 am Link to this comment

lornejl

He’s probably not a mensa member. BUT, mensas can be just as bigoted as anybody else.

So, mensa member hasn’t proved any particular intelligence, but he has proved a racist hatred that is definitely noteworthy.

I’m guessing it’s probably just as well..a reminder that there are always deadly elements in our midst.

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 11:30 am Link to this comment

You write:      “I guess I couldn’t be bothered to go read position papers on a website when the candidate couldn’t even speak to them intelligently.”

Thank you for having the courage yo say this. I have thought it many times and have wanted to say as much on this site a number of times, but I guess I lack the courage. Or maybe I just get tired of pointing out the obvious so often.

Report this

By Tom Joad, March 21, 2008 at 10:50 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Joe in Maine”—any chance that Richardson endorsed Obama because he honestly believes that Obama would make a great president?

Blind loyalty (to the Clinton’s) would mean that if you had ever voted for Bill Clinton in the past, you must vote for Hillary now.  That’s - in a word - undemocratic (or dumb - you pick the word you like better).

Report this

By ongre11, March 21, 2008 at 10:45 am Link to this comment

I liked Bill as President, but this fight is about ego and opportunity, not public service.

Several years ago I concluded that anyone who wanted to be President really bad should not be allowed.  You gotta be a little touched to want that job.

I feel a person who must be convinced to run is a better candidate.

That said, we gotta have someone and I will vote for the candidate brought forward by the Democratic Party.
And yes, Bill Richardson would have been my first choice.

Report this

By Bettym47, March 21, 2008 at 10:38 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I use to be a huge fan of Bill Richardson’s. What a two faced guy he is. He probably feels he won’t get the Veep slot with Clinton so he’s throwing his support to Obama. Obama is trying to get the Latino vote in the general election. Anyway, please continue the conversation on my blog as well at http://www.elections2008online.com. Thank you.

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 21, 2008 at 10:31 am Link to this comment

Let me take a huge step backwards here and adress a personal issue I have with you Aegrus. Had I known you were from Florida I would have taken a much softer tone with you. I am so sorry for your troubles. Bill Crist? I am so, so sorry for you. Please accept my heartfelt appology for heaping more onto your plate than you deserve. BTW. If McCain chooses Crist for Veep can the slogan be: McCain for Crist’s Sake! Just wondering.

Damn your guy for always saying in the debates, “Yeah. What she said” in response to the serious issues of the campaign, over and over again. I guess I couldn’t be bothered to go read position papers on a website when the candidate couldn’t even speak to them intelligently.

Report this

By Aegrus, March 21, 2008 at 9:23 am Link to this comment

I live in Florida. We have a serious issue with voter suppression and fraud perpetrated by Republican surrogates (not necessarily elected officials) throughout this state. I wouldn’t chalk Florida up to any party until we have competent officials who agree on a better system of voting, and organize to work against the suppression occurring in every election since 2000.

Whatever “gashes” are in the Obama boat are likely to be repaired shortly. Since Hillary is weathering the storm of her lies on NAFTA, her triangulation with NAFTA and the Canadian government, her association with a religious “family” with Nazi-fascist ties and insincerity… well, I think Obama has more than a chance to let his character shine through these false claims, talking points and non-issues trying to sink his powerhouse campaign.

However, please continue to do your best to get your candidate elected. Just, don’t take queues from her campaign managers. Please start talking about her valid good points instead of all the exaggerations and character assassination with which her surrogates are involved. It doesn’t help her in the long run.

Report this

By Aegrus, March 21, 2008 at 9:12 am Link to this comment

I don’t adhere to any bible for a very good reason.

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 21, 2008 at 9:03 am Link to this comment

Aegrus - You seem to have the ‘inevitability’ dance down pat. That worked pretty well for Hillary too.

Hey. I want to wish you and your guy all the luck in the world. I’m a democrat and I just want to win. Obama would be a far better president than McCain. No question in my mind. I do have some serious doubts that Obama can recapture his earlier magic momentum and pull a voter coalition big enough to beat McCain in the fall.

So keep up the good work of the last month. Way to stay on message guys. Campaigns aren’t won in March, pal. Good luck holding on to your Titanic deck chair I hope it makes for a decent flotation device in the general election. Your candidate has a 500 foot gash in his side now and is taking on a lot of water. All the bilge pumping in the world won’t bring the Reagan Dems and Indies back. I wouldn’t count on the good people of MI and FL or Hillary supporters (49% of your DEM base) to save your campaign either. Just because you can’t see the iceberg you just hit and just because you think your ship is unsinkable does not make it so.

Report this

By lornejl, March 21, 2008 at 8:55 am Link to this comment

Clinton was a great president, ONLY in comparison to the repig presidents. Alfred E Neuman would be a great president compared to them.

Report this

By lornejl, March 21, 2008 at 8:50 am Link to this comment

MENSA member ? Haha ! funny stuff.

Report this

By Aegrus, March 21, 2008 at 8:22 am Link to this comment

What a clearly bigoted, narrow-minded, fear-mongering statement to make. Perhaps you should involve yourself in the newly established dialog on race to become a little more enlightened to your own ignorance.

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 8:21 am Link to this comment

Roberta writes;  “toyaalyy”

Sorry for the mis-spelling. i can spell. I just can’t type. Especially before my morning caffeine.

Report this

By Aegrus, March 21, 2008 at 7:32 am Link to this comment

Pfft. You two just don’t get what the rest of America is implicitly understanding. Barack Obama is the better candidate this year. Hillary should have run back in 2004. Obama is the better of the two candidates right now because he has more political courage, has a better resumé of judgment and can confront problems head-on.

Every educated progressive sees Obama’s victory to be self-evident. You’re hanging on for whatever reason, of which I won’t presume. Wait until Gore and Edwards endorse Obama as well. You’ll be asking yourself how all this could happen in the wake of Hillary’s continued lying, triangulation and horrible campaigning against her own merits.


I mean, come on. There were a million and one reasons to vote for Hillary in the beginning of the primary season, but she didn’t run on any of her valid positives. Instead, she chose to exaggerate her claims of experience and commit character assassination. Pretty stupid on her part. Then, she changed her campaign message every week, and molded her campaign around the slogans and platforms of every other Democratic nominee. Also stupid. Hillary should have had this primary locked up in the first two months. Her fault for losing.

Report this

By bert, March 21, 2008 at 7:19 am Link to this comment

I am not so sure Joe, that it will have much impact at all. He did not get that many votes and I don’t think he even got many, if any, delegates. I think most voters outside NM don’t even know who he is. Bill who???????

But I toyaalyy agree with you with regard to loyalty.

Report this

By Joe Sixpack, March 21, 2008 at 7:05 am Link to this comment

It seems so strange to me that a man who could never have run for president without a resume of appointments under Bill Clinton could completly turn his back on Hillary. So much for loyalty.

It’s a damaging endorsement for the Clintons given the enormous clout Richardson will no doubt have on the huge Latino populations of PA and IA. Obama must be thanking his lucky stars this morning.

Report this

By Jerry, March 21, 2008 at 6:25 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Great endorsement for Obama, although it is a little late in the game. I can understand the politics behind B. Richardson’s delay, but come on now. Do you need to wait nearly 2 months before endorsing another candidate?

In any case the move is not that shocking, Obama just continues to snow ball his support from all angles. Just looking at his grassroots support, http://www.spartaninternet.com/ , the Internet strategy that he has been using is unparalleled. Of course the new polls contradict this, but we will see the ultimate outcome soon. If I was a betting man, I would put my money on Barack!

Report this

By Aegrus, March 21, 2008 at 5:15 am Link to this comment

Interesting. I hadn’t thought we’d get Richardson to spill the beans on who he supports in the primary. Maybe Al Gore or John Edwards will follow suit. Both of which, I think would go for Obama as well.

Report this

Page 2 of 2 pages  <  1 2

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.