PDA

View Full Version : Obama's Problems


Bloggingheads
04-28-2008, 09:11 AM

Joel_Cairo
04-28-2008, 11:32 AM
Ooof, what a depressing monday morning diavlog.

I agree with this bit (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10580?in=00:13:56&out=00:14:13), about how Obama is losing the Fl & MI spinwar. But, as far as I can see, there's no way he can meaningfully win this issue. To win the spinwar, he has to further jeopardize winning the states in Nov. He'd have to keep repeating "Florida and Michigan don't matter!", which only serves to stoke grudges against him in key states where he'd have had an uphill battle to begin with. The fact that Obama is, you know, totally and completely in the right about the validity of the MI & FL is neither here nor there, the whole sack of snakes is nothing but downside for him.

AemJeff
04-28-2008, 11:41 AM
Whatever else might be said, this was a good, and illuminating conversation. This exchange (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10580?in=00:31:35&out=00:33:05) in particular gets at at the substance (or lack of same) on Obama's relationship with Ayers.

brucds
04-28-2008, 12:22 PM
This is one of the BEST predictably shameless and dishonest rants Kidney Failure has mustered to date. Not going to waste much time with it because this guy's exposed himself as a not-too-bright wannabe hitman who specializes in vitriol too consistently in other threads, other than to note there has been nothing coming from the Obama camp that even begins to compare with the "gender card" attacks that have come from the Clintonistas like New York NOW and others in the "feminist ancien regime" against Obama supporters and that posting Sean Wilentz' resume in order to validate his rather remarkably lame apologetics for Clinton is an exercise more in humor than in logic. (Forgot to mention that his parents owned the famous 8th Street Bookstore in Greenwich Village, that he wrote the Rolling Stone piece dubbing W "the worst President in American history. None of that cool stuff stopped him from making the professorial judgement that Obama's campaign has used the "the most outrageous deployment of racial politics since the Willie Horton ad campaign in 1988." Which tendentious assertion MUST BE TRUE because it came from a guy with a PhD.)

I swear to God, if I ever make an argument - especially an "argument" in the worst sense of the word, like painful Kidneystones - that includes the resumes of people I quote in order to prove just how smart they were and, therefore, how powerful my case, would the bloggingheads monitors please delete it and spare me the eternal embarrassment of it living on the web.

David Thomson
04-28-2008, 12:30 PM
Middle of the road voters are finding out that "Barry" Obama is a race hustler. Nobody put a gun to his head and forced him to join a racist church. Obama did this on his own volition. He also freely chose to embrace the writings of the radical left. Obama appears to know next to nothing about the views of either Thomas Sowell or Shelby Steele. He is a smoother talking Al Sharpton who graduated from Harvard Law School. Obama will be rejected by the electorate not because of his race---but the content of his character. He would easily be elected president if the Illinois U.S. senator was a center right Republican.

It is very fair to say that Obama, as a practical matter, is anti-white. He has every intention of cooperating with the guilt tripped whites that graduated from the Ivy league schools and sticking it to the overall white community. Affirmative action programs will grow by leaps and bounds. Racial preferences will become even more of the norm.

piscivorous
04-28-2008, 12:40 PM
You and I don't agree on much but I have to admit you have pretty much hit the nail on the head in your portrayal of the tenor, tone and content of kidneystones post in to Democratic primary and it's candidates. I also found the humor of you commenting on the use of vitriol as being offensive, as I have a hard time deciding which of the two of you are the most prolific in it's use, quite entertaining.

Joel_Cairo
04-28-2008, 12:41 PM
This is one of the BEST predictably shameless and dishonest rants Kidney Failure has mustered to date. Not going to waste much time with it because this guy's exposed himself as a not-too-bright wannabe hitman...

Another good reason not to invest effort responding is that it was already addressed the last time he posted this exact same wild-eyed screed (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=75406#poststop).

piscivorous
04-28-2008, 12:52 PM
Will it all come down to Denver and this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwirWWnzJKM)

brucds
04-28-2008, 12:53 PM
So I read York's tale of the two rallies and at one a bunch of white folks cheering Hillary say they'd not vote or vote for McCain over Obama because they're not "comfortable" with him, while at the other black folks say they'd vote for Hillary if she were the nominee. And the Obama camp is the one that's mired in racial politics, according to certain of our commenters and a certain Yale professor (of American history, no less.)

Yeah, it's all real clear. Against my better judgement and my "hope", I'm having a Jeremiah Wright moment - too many white people are still pretty fucked up. That said, Obama will win both the nomination and the general - assuming that the Clintons really aren't so pathological and narcissistic that their aim is to sabotage his candidacy so Hillary's got a shot at '12. I confess, at this point - after the McCarthyite smears and racial coding they've personally and quite deliberately tagged to Obama when they've stood in front of the media megaphone - I'm beginning to fear that's the level of blind ambition we're dealing with. On the other hand, Obama's beaten two Clintons on the turf where their brand has been most luminous. I guess he can handle an old, out-of-touch coot who's got nuthin' but Bush Lite.

piscivorous
04-28-2008, 02:06 PM
If Mr. York would like to know a little more about just how deep Senator Obama's ties with Mr. Ayers are it might behoove him to look at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Fund (http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/publications/p0b06.pdf). A fund of which Senator Obama was the first Chairman of the Board and Mr Ayers, along with being one of the primary authors in the grant request was the Co-Chair. It might also speak to the issue of Senator Obama's ability to deliver by looking at the independent assessment of the performance of the fund schools Chicago Annenberg Challenge experience (http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/8c/e1.pdf).

Both links are pdfs and as political documents are quite wordy. For more general information about The Annenberg Challenge (http://www.annenberginstitute.org/challenge/index.html) here is their WEB site.

P.S. While I fist decided that not to include this, as it seems on the border line of being "irrelevant" it seems that Senator Obama's ties to the Ayers family also includes serving on the board of the Leadership Council of the Chicago Public Schools Education Fund (http://www.cpef.org/flash.htm), the successor organization to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Fund with Thomas Ayers, Bill Ayers father, and John Ayers his brother.

David Thomson
04-28-2008, 02:10 PM
"I'm less sure than you about the increase in affirmative action programs."

I am very confident that Obama and his guilt tripped white followers will royally stick it to non-Ivy league whites. There will be a tacit agreement between him and these folks that he won't bother them---as long as he can slam the white majority. The latter must realize that the graduates of Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and the other "elite" schools are not their friends.

David Thomson
04-28-2008, 02:18 PM
Never forget that roughly four decades ago the graduates of the "elite" schools screwed over the white majority with their busing schemes. Their children were not bussed! No, only the children of the non elites. This was the tacitly understood deal struck between the black radicals and the white "elites." The same thing with a vengeance will occur in 2009 if "Barry" Obama become president.

graz
04-28-2008, 02:38 PM
If Mr. York would like to know a little more about just how deep Senator Obama's ties with Mr. Ayers are it might behoove him to look at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Fund (http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/publications/p0b06.pdf). A fund of which Senator Obama was the first Chairman of the Board and Mr Ayers, along with being one of the primary authors in the grant request was the Co-Chair. It might also speak to the issue of
Senator Obama's ability to deliver by looking at the independent assessment of the performance of the fund schools Chicago Annenberg Challenge experience (http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/8c/e1.pdf).

Both links are pdfs and as political documents are quite wordy. For more general information about The Annenberg Challenge (http://www.annenberginstitute.org/challenge/index.html) here is their WEB site.

I think your point about using the assessment of the program as a test of Obama's ability to deliver is fair and would be a good starting point for debate.

As to Byron's point about wanting to "know more about the relationship" between the two, not so much. He simply wants to be able to use the coded shorthand of "character and association' as ground-cover for keeping open any and all political wounds that further debase his electoral chances.
If it is about Ayers, York can do the research as well as you or I. What bearing it "should have," we can argue about indefinitely. Whatever his motives, it's effect is bound to stoke the fires of the gift that keeps on giving - because disproving a negative isn't possible - as kidneystones posts prove. We will see how effective this timeless gambit is come November.

graz
04-28-2008, 02:45 PM
[QUOTE=kidneystones;75439]Good News!

Ayers, Rezko, Wright and Obama.


How about sung to the tune of "Lions and tigers and bears , oh my!"

Thus Spoke Elvis
04-28-2008, 02:50 PM
Will it all come down to Denver and this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwirWWnzJKM)

As that clip demonstrates, in this period of uncertainty, Moe Howard has the kind of no-nonsense, get-things-done approach that this country needs in a President.

Like Barrack Obama, Moe Howard promises to meet with leaders of all foreign nations, regardless of whether they have an antagonistic position towards the United States. Unlike Barrack Obama, Moe Howard promises to use such meetings as an opportunity to eye-poke and face-slap anyone who's been acting like a wise guy.

Some have questioned whether Moe Howard has the experience necessary to be president. But these critics conveniently ignore the 40+ years of real-world experience that informs Moe Howard's thought process. As someone who has practiced medicine (http://www.veoh.com/videos/v256626gbss5RgR) on occassion, Moe Howard will bring valuable insight to resolving the health care problems we currently face. And while other candidates promise to make America the leader in science and research, Moe Howard has a proven record of commitment, dating back to his ground-breaking work in the field of theoretical physics and time travel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Three_Stooges_Meet_Hercules).

But despite these lofty accomplishments, Moe Howard is no elitist. At various points in his life, Moe Howard has been a plumber, a construction worker, a house painter, and a multitude of other blue-collar occupations. These experiences have helped to inform Moe Howard's economic policy, and he will take special care to ensure that that the interests of the little guy are always taken into account.

In addition to his personal qualities, Moe Howard is also a fine judge of talent. While nothing is set in stone, it is heavily rumored that Richard "Curly" (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Richard_L._Armitage.jpeg) Armitage will be running the Howard Administration's foreign policy, while Jim "Don't Call Me Larry" (http://www.newamerica.net/people/james_pinkerton) Pinkerton will be responsible for shaping a domestic policy agenda based on bedrock conservative principles.

brucds
04-28-2008, 03:02 PM
Since Walter Annenberg, the guy who funneled this "education" money to unreconstructed terrorists, was one of Ronald Reagan's closest friends, IMHO this pretty much explains the Obama/Reagan apologetics that have been brought forward by the good Senator from New York. Thanks for digging up this critical, enlightening web of nefarious connections, KidneyStone.

(Ask me about 9/11!)

graz
04-28-2008, 03:04 PM
As that clip demonstrates, in this period of uncertainty, Moe Howard has the kind of no-nonsense, get-things-done approach that this country needs in a President.

Like Barrack Obama, Moe Howard promises to meet with leaders of all foreign nations, regardless of whether they have an antagonistic position towards the United States. Unlike Barrack Obama, Moe Howard promises to use such meetings as an opportunity to eye-poke and face-slap anyone who's been acting like a wise guy.

Some have questioned whether Moe Howard has the experience necessary to be president. But these critics conveniently ignore the 40+ years of real-world experience that informs Moe Howard's thought process. As someone who has practiced medicine (http://www.veoh.com/videos/v256626gbss5RgR) on occassion, Moe Howard will bring valuable insight to resolving the health care problems we currently face. And while other candidates promise to make America the leader in science and research, Moe Howard has a proven record of commitment, dating back to his ground-breaking work in the field of theoretical physics and time travel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Three_Stooges_Meet_Hercules).

But despite these lofty accomplishments, Moe Howard is no elitist. At various points in his life, Moe Howard has been a plumber, a construction worker, a house painter, and a multitude of other blue-collar occupations. These experiences have helped to inform Moe Howard's economic policy, and he will take special care to ensure that that the interests of the little guy are always taken into account.

In addition to his personal qualities, Moe Howard is also a fine judge of talent. While nothing is set in stone, it is heavily rumored that Richard "Curly" (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Richard_L._Armitage.jpeg) Armitage will be running the Howard Administration's foreign policy, while Jim "Don't Call Me Larry" (http://www.newamerica.net/people/james_pinkerton) Pinkerton will be responsible for shaping a domestic policy agenda based on bedrock conservative principles.

Well I oughtaaa... nominate your post for the non-existent but should be "bhtv Colbert Award."
Along with the recent increase in forum invective comes a string of Moe, Larry and Curly links and references. It could be worse.

piscivorous
04-28-2008, 03:16 PM
Least we not forget he also knows the spy business too. Sign me up.

Wonderment
04-28-2008, 06:35 PM
Against my better judgement and my "hope", I'm having a Jeremiah Wright moment - too many white people are still pretty fucked up.

Who was the right-wing commentator on BHeads that predicted J Wright would be incapable of staying out of the media spotlight? I think it was J Pinkerton. Smart!

If Obama goes down in flames, there will be a lot of blame cast on the Clintons and Wright himself. But voters will have their own racism to blame, and the world will be in deeper trouble with Clinton or McCain as president.

Bobby G
04-28-2008, 07:18 PM
First, re: Donnie McClurkin: to say he "spewed homophobic hate" seems a bit much to me. He thinks homosexuality is disordered or perhaps even sinful, and he thinks homosexual intercourse is sinful. While the expressions of these positions could plausibly be regarded as "spewing homophobic hate", I think such a description is too much, given that this is the position of the vast majority of Christians, Americans, politicians. It might be wrong, it might be bad, its expression certainly contributes to the suffering of homosexuals, but I should think it does not rise to the level of "spewed homophobic hate". Second, re: McClurkin: I think your characterization of his appearance--as "pander[ing] to conservative Dems loyal to HRC, many of them African-American" and as "sent" by Obama--is misleading. It gives the impression that McClurkin was a special envoy of Obama's and the main event of the evening. I didn't get that from reading the link you selected; rather, it was my impression that he was one among many singers at that event. Perhaps I misread it, though.

Third, re: Wilentz: you take note of his quote from the TNR piece about Jesse Jackson, Jr. pointing out her lack of tears for Katrina victims. It's certainly a fair point that Jackson's remark was an unneeded injection of race into the campaign; but on the other hand, it is a good observation: the only time Clinton cried publicly is for herself, when she thought she would lose the primary--and not when numerous people were suffering. That is somewhat telling (although I agree, I don't think it's racially motivated).

Fourth, I agree with you about Wilentz being a reputable historian, and certainly much more trustworthy as a source than Sean Hannity. That doesn't mean, though, that he's utterly unimpeachable, or that he's immune to bias, smart as he is.

Fifth, you write that "By February, the accusations that Obama's opponents were racist and/or race-baiting were in full swing. Mentioning that Obama, like Jesse Jackson, had immense support among the African-American community was equated with racism." Could you source this? Are you referring to Ferraro's remarks? I assume not, because you refer to her later in your comment. I can't respond to this until you give evidence for it.

Sixth, the Kamiya/Ferraro comparison: Surely the fact that Ferraro is much better known, and that she has an official position in Clinton's campaign--as opposed to Kamiya, who is relatively unknown and has no official position with the Obama campaign--matters here. She can justly be lambasted because the positions of official staffers can be more directly tied to a campaign than the positions of supporters. As it happens, though, I think her remarks, and to a lesser extent Kamiya's, were correct. So she shouldn't have been lambasted, by my lights. Still, I don't take her public upbraiding to be particularly disgusting or despair-inducing.

Finally, seventh, I don't know what you're referring to when you write that the Obama campaign "brand[s] non-AA opponents as racists; and AA voters as race-traitors to terrorize them into voting for the candidate." Do you have a source for this?

In closing, for you to say that the Obama campaign "is by far the most disgusting spectacle I've witnessed in recent years" strikes me as highly hyperbolic. What about the tarnishing of Max Cleland, the black baby claim made about McCain, etc.?

bjkeefe
04-28-2008, 09:20 PM
Dear Bob:

While I think Michael and Byron were better than most pundits have been on this discussion, I really wish you would make an extra effort to book diavlogs that will talk about something other than the presidential campaign, particularly the race for the Democratic nomination.

In the first place, I am hearing almost nothing on these topics that isn't available everywhere else, and that hasn't already been talked to death. This stands in direct opposition to BH.tv's usual excellence in airing in-depth explorations of issues that don't dominate the headlines.

In the second place, it's not making for any interesting discussion in the forums. I doubt even 1% of the people who post here haven't long since chosen their preferred candidate. The comments posted, consequentially, are nothing but an endless rehashing of the same talking points, exaggerated allegations, out of proportion emphases on trivialities, heated attempts to rebut, and are all too often devolving into personal attacks and mindless bickering.

I acknowledge some of this behavior in myself, and all I can say to that is that I am now making a special effort to stop.

My point is this: There is nothing left to say about Ayers, Wright, lapel pins, Hillary's viability, elitism, whether Obama supporters have their heads in the clouds, whether Obama detractors are deranged, how race is a factor, how gender is a factor, and whatever else I've thankfully managed to block out. Everyone has made up his or her mind about the importance, or not, of every one of these "issues." The attempts by many to campaign on behalf of, or against, a particular candidate have absolutely no hope of swaying anyone else who is reading.

So, please, Bob: Let's give the horse race diavlogs a rest. Let us hear about something else for while. In two weeks, we'll have some solid voting results and will have passed another hurdle in this interminable campaign. In the meantime, please give us something else to talk about.

Thank you.

===============

Postscript: I see that a diavlog between Robert Reich and Glenn Loury has just gone up. Even without having viewed it, I think I can compliment you on your ability to read minds. More like that, please.

===============

PPS: Having now watched most of Reich/Loury diavlog, I withdraw half of my compliment.

===============

PPPS: Having now watched it all. please change "half" to "three-quarters."

Wonderment
04-28-2008, 09:50 PM
Let us hear about something else for while. In two weeks, we'll have some solid voting results and will have passed another hurdle in this interminable campaign. In the meantime, please give us something else to talk about.

I agree. The Dem. nomination has become a spectacle in the OJ Simpson tradition. It saturates the media and dangerously displaces discussion of more important issues. Obamamania and evil twin Obamaphobia are a distraction.

bjkeefe
04-28-2008, 09:51 PM
kidneystones:

Thanks for your reply. I'd say it goes a long way in strengthening my case.

AemJeff
04-28-2008, 09:56 PM
I agree. The Dem. nomination has become a spectacle in the OJ Simpson tradition. It saturates the media and dangerously displaces discussion of more important issues. Obamamania and evil twin Obamaphobia are a distraction.

And, I'd add, are near to being responsible for what would be a tragedy: making the BHTV comments section dull.

Whatfur
04-28-2008, 10:53 PM
BJK writes:

"The comments posted, consequentially, are nothing but an endless rehashing of the same talking points, exaggerated allegations, out of proportion emphases on trivialities, heated attempts to rebut, and are all too often devolving into personal attacks and mindless bickering.

I acknowledge some of this behavior in myself, and all I can say to that is that I am now making a special effort to stop. "

To which I can only ask the question?

Some? You're a funny (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwriOyQf1EA)guy.

(only choose link if you promise to imagine the subjects being read BJK's comments)

bjkeefe
04-28-2008, 11:06 PM
Whatfur:

Thank you for joining kidneystones in an effort to support my points.

Whatfur
04-28-2008, 11:50 PM
Whatfur:

Thank you for joining kidneystones in an effort to support my points.

BJ...take a midol.

Seriously...

Some more rehashing by our heads...but wonderful, telling stuff about the party of the people <insert raspberries here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLlJLpd3utY)>...


Has anyone seen Chad? (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10580?in=00:10:39&out=00:10:56)

Superdelegates, I believe, are smarter dem dare bitter, church-goin, gun slingin, regular type delegates. (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10580?in=00:14:29&out=00:14:55)

They call'em the way they see'em and if they would rather not see'em they make them up! (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10580?in=00:12:26&out=00:13:05)

piscivorous
04-29-2008, 12:01 AM
Actually it is not to bad a strategy. Senator Obama has essentially said he is like an old crazy uncle that says some things you don't agree with and is essentially harmless. Pastor Wright is now free to go out and attack the attackers and act like the crazy old uncle.

This allows Senator Obama to completely distance himself from the reverend, and reinforces the crazy old uncle claim, most of us had or have one, thus creating a discount between the ideals advocated by the reverend and Senator Obama's responsibility for having not taken previous action to disavow the ideology. Seems like a two for the price of one to me.

bjkeefe
04-29-2008, 12:17 AM
That's an interesting and subtle point, pisc. Unfortunately for Obama, I don't think very many voters for whom Wright is an issue will reach this same conclusion. I think, instead, it will merely add to their guilt-by-association thinking. Also, there is no doubt in my mind that the Clinton and McCain campaigns will be happy to push this.

piscivorous
04-29-2008, 12:25 AM
It's the voters in the middle that see it as somewhat of a problem, but not terminal, that he needs to hold on to and for some of these it will be sufficient. How many is debatable but your guess is as good as mine.

bjkeefe
04-29-2008, 12:33 AM
... your guess is as good as mine.

Indeed. And that pretty well sums up 99% of the campaign-focused discussion.

brucds
04-29-2008, 12:40 AM
"brucds confirmed the kind of politics of assassination Ayers-Obama practices"

You're a flaming fucking crackpot. Kiss my ass...and quit embarrassing yourself. You've turned these threads into a travesty of rational discussion. Truly a toxic piece of shit.

bjkeefe
04-29-2008, 12:54 AM
brucds:

While I'm with you in spirit and agree with your assessment, I respectfully suggest that responding as you did only compounds the overall problem. Better to ignore, or if you feel compelled to respond, to do so with dignity.

It should be obvious that the person to whom you're replying is just here to provoke the reaction that you supplied. You're not going to get him to stop by giving him what he wants.

Eastwest
04-29-2008, 12:56 AM
On Brucie's:

You're a flaming f###ing crackpot. Kiss my a##...and quit embarrassing yourself. You've turned these threads into a travesty of rational discussion. Truly a toxic piece of sh##.

Brucie: Get your mommie to change BHTV site settings in your Browser to "Adults Only." Meanwhile, for you:

AP (55 minutes ago) WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton now leads John McCain by 9 points in a head-to-head presidential matchup, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll that bolsters her argument that she is more electable than Democratic rival Barack Obama.

Obama and Republican McCain are running about even.

The survey released Monday gives the New York senator and former first lady a fresh talking point as she works to raise much-needed campaign cash and persuade pivotal undecided superdelegates to side with her in the drawn-out Democratic primary fight.

Helped by independents, young people and seniors, Clinton gained ground this month in a hypothetical match with Sen. McCain, the GOP nominee-in-waiting. She now leads McCain, 50 percent to 41 percent, while Obama remains virtually tied with McCain, 46 percent to 44 percent.

Both Democrats were roughly even with McCain in the previous poll about three weeks ago.

EW

harkin
04-29-2008, 12:58 AM
Bob,

Regarding the 'open letter':


Just want to say that there are many here who realize this board is for talking about relevant issues (e.g. American politics, specifically the 08 nominations and general election) and just because some here don't like the way things are going is no reason whatsoever to stop talking about them. A spirited discussion where at least one side engages in discussing 'facts' as opposed to ad hominen attacks (or the incredible 'It's dull' [translation: make it go away']) still serves a real purpose.

The request of an end to discussing the American presidential election is not only without merit but echoes a previous request to end all discussion of William Ayers because facts were being presented which not only enlightened and informed most, but also embarrassed and angered others.


Changing subjects here...while I'm not an Obama supporter, I totally back him up that the Michigan and Flordia results should not be counted (unless there is a revote) because he is the only candidate who respected the original rules of his party (written up by the HRC people - btw). I can't really blame Obama for wanting to stick to the current rules because without them (i.e. using the same winner-take-all format as the Republicans and the general election) HRC would be the clear leader. Now that the FL and MI numbers favor her, she is shamelessly doing everything she can to go back on her own words.

Troubling for BO (at least the way I understand it) is that the convention rules people are all in her pocket.

And lastly, while I don't consider the 'flag pin' issue very important, it was Obama himself who was the one who characterized anyone who wears one as being some sort of phony. It was the same sort of mis-step as he made in his 'bitter' comments in SF. Condescending generalizations.

Eastwest
04-29-2008, 01:10 AM
Folks might remind themselves that the Diavlogs are certainly not meant for the exclusive consumption of the odd collection of folks who obsess on commenting on every one of them.

The DVs vary in their quality and personnel and it would seem a little strange for anyone to look on BHTV diavlogs as the sole source of informational "oxygen" supplying their minds.

I say, go ahead and just keep doing what your doing, and where there are masochistic potential DV participants waiting in the wings wishing to contribute on a wider variety of topics, just fold them in at a faster turnover rate to the already scheduled stream of electoral obsession.

Didn't agree with everything said by these folks. But, actually, that's good. Too much agreement is toxic to reflective thought.

If you want to create a different mix, great, but don't make changes based on the opinions of this crew! Please.

EW

piscivorous
04-29-2008, 01:19 AM
...Changing subjects here...while I'm not an Obama supporter, I totally back him up that the Michigan and Flordia results should not be counted (unless there is a revote) because he is the only candidate who respected the original rules of his party (written up by the HRC people - btw). I can't really blame Obama for wanting to stick to the current rules because without them (i.e. using the same winner-take-all format as the Republicans and the general election) HRC would be the clear leader. Now that the FL and MI numbers favor her, she is shamelessly doing everything she can to go back on her own words... Actually didn't most of the campaigns conform to the rules. While I don't know them in detail but in general there was to be no campaigning. I don't believe that there was a requirement to not place your name on the ballot or to remove it. Senators Obama and Edwards choose to remove their names for what reason there can be numerous explanations.

Wonderment
04-29-2008, 01:29 AM
Actually it is not to bad a strategy. Senator Obama has essentially said he is like an old crazy uncle that says some things you don't agree with and is essentially harmless. Pastor Wright is now free to go out and attack the attackers and act like the crazy old uncle.

I think today's spectacle hurt Obama a lot. Prior to this weekend, Obama had a good argument: he claimed the infamous loop of Wright took everything out of context.

But today Rev. Wright pretty much reiterated all the objectionable stuff -- including the extremely crackpot AIDS theory -- independent of context.

The support expressed for Farrakhan will also hurt Obama. Many Jews will think THAT is when Barack should have walked out of the church.

Still, this is hardly a deal breaker for Obama. I'm not counting Clinton out, but I think a Obama (battered by Hilary and the right wing) will be the nominee. So he's a candidate with some baggage. Ditto for Hillary. Ditto for McCain. It's too early to call, but my bet is that Americans are sick enough of Bush to punish the Republicans mercilessly again in November.

brucds
04-29-2008, 01:42 AM
but there's a point at which it's crazy to feign politeness to a raving boor who's only impulse is obviously some perverse, disruptive narcissism. I'd give him points for provocation if I weren't bored by the constant repetition.

piscivorous
04-29-2008, 01:43 AM
I'd almost agree with you but if one looks at the right wing blogisphere the infamous "beclowned" is starting to be thrown about and both Senator Obama and the Reverend Wright are too intelligent to, after the passage of weeks, to purposefully reignite the issue with out some purpose. And please Paster Wright is "going to be after the Senator." I mean what's up with that?

piscivorous
04-29-2008, 01:47 AM
For those that are finding the acrimony and repetition, of talking points, getting to them try this out for a laugh Front Fell Off (http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/252808/)

bjkeefe
04-29-2008, 03:22 AM
harkin:

The request of an end to discussing the American presidential election is not only without merit but echoes a previous request to end all discussion of William Ayers because facts were being presented which not only enlightened and informed most, but also embarrassed and angered others.

To be clear, I wasn't requesting "an end to discussing the American presidential election." I was only asking for a break until there is something new to talk about.

I think your claim that the discussion over Ayers presents "facts" or informs anybody is mistaken, and indeed disingenuous. It's obvious that people who hang out in these forums are well aware of political news. There isn't really that much to the Ayres story -- it basically comes down to Obama knew him somewhat. All the rest is spin. I'll grant that it may have been worth discussing for a while, but that time has long since passed.

There is no embarrassment about Ayers on the part of Obama supporters, and the anger that is on display here is solely due to the incessant harping on the story. The truth is, you and several other commenters are doing little else besides reinforcing what you already believe and taking pleasure in baiting others. You're not informing anyone of anything.

As I said in my earlier post, I'm certain that virtually everyone here has long since made up his or her mind about the candidates. I'd add to that my belief that most of the long-time participants would say that the discussions on this site have gone way downhill lately. That's due in part to the paucity of topics and in part to the shortening of everyone's tempers.

You and your fellow Obama-haters have made your point on the Ayers issue. It's time to give it a rest.

bjkeefe
04-29-2008, 03:25 AM
brucds:

... but there's a point at which it's crazy to feign politeness ...

Agreed. In that case, I can only think of one other thing to do: ignore the bait. You've given it your best shot at trying to convince those who are annoying you to stop. What you're doing by responding in kind is clearly not working, and worse, it's just encouraging more of the same. Be bigger than them.

artoad
04-29-2008, 03:56 AM
I think Wright's performance today at the National Press Club today takes Obama to a new level of difficulty. Before they were comparing Obama's aloofness and elitism to Stevenson/Dukakis/Kerry. If Obama doesn't Sistah Souljah Wright with almost as much vengeance as Wright damns America they'll be comparing him to Thomas Eagleton and not the above three. Any way, How long did Eagleton spend in the hospital? A few weeks, a month? Obama and his family spent twenty years in the pastoral "care" of that strutting demented egomaniac.

Eastwest
04-29-2008, 04:04 AM
I think Wright's performance today at the National Press Club today takes Obama to a new level of difficulty. ... Obama and his family spent twenty years in the pastoral "care" of that strutting demented egomaniac.

Too funny. Oliphant, the cartoonist puts it very nicely right here:

http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/patoliphant;_ylt=AqtAIgP04SgGQ9jBtRhb9Zw0vTYC

EW

johnmarzan
04-29-2008, 04:58 AM
barack did well in his fox news sunday interview yesterday. brit hume called it "impressive". even i'm beginning to soften my views on the guy.

it was impressive because chris wallace asked some tough and interesting questions, and obama delivered. unlike at msnbc where the people there are fawning over their messiah, and instead of asking probing questions about his past associations and other issues of "distractions", they try to protect him from tough scrutiny. but they are not doing him any favors by babying obama and going on attack mode like a hack surrogate against any criticism on barack.

he needs to go to foxnews more to reach out to a certain segment of white voters that up to now he has difficulty gaining support.

Whatfur
04-29-2008, 08:44 AM
Concerning the Obama/Wallace interview...although Obama WAS asked the questions we wanted asked (albeit the taping missed a news cycle that would have added additional), I thought Wallace let Obama skate or sit pat on most the answers. Such as his "tangential" Ayers relationship again compared to Obama's relationships with right wingers...we needed a follow-up there by Wallace bringing up what we know about that relationship and then pinning Obama down on which right winger does he have that kind of relationship with. There is NONE.

Now it was nice and civil and Obama didn't trip over his teeth like he did during the debate and the lefties who were "wetting themselves (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/29754_Lefties_Seething_Over_Obama_on_Fox)" beforehand were shown to be...well...who they are (http://www.pbase.com/ces0357/image/56819062), but it did not have me warming to the fellow at all because with everything that has/is/will come out about who he REALLY is ...I could only see a fraud.

So I was disappointed a bit and thought Wallace gave the guy a bit of a pass in comparison to other Wallace interviews I have seen...then it hit me...
Chris wants him back...when his guard is down and it really means something.

In any case, pisc's "front fell off " interview above was far more entertaining.

brucds
04-29-2008, 10:46 AM
Truly a ghastly proposition. Among other things, you've commited the sin of becoming boorishly boring.

johnmarzan
04-29-2008, 11:10 AM
i think it's time for barack to "sister souljah" his loony pastor once and for all.

johnmarzan
04-29-2008, 11:12 AM
or maybe barack can't do that because it might backfire (in the sense that obama's spiritual mentor probably knows too many of barack's skeletons and secrets.)

AemJeff
04-29-2008, 11:49 AM
or maybe barack can't do that because it might backfire (in the sense that obama's spiritual mentor probably knows too many of barack's skeletons and secrets.)

Another (I think more realistic) hypothesis is that he sees a risk of alienating a fraction of his most ardent supporters.

TwinSwords
04-29-2008, 01:52 PM
Wright is going to keep bragging about his deep connection to Ayers-Obama from here on in and so Wright should. Why?
[B]

Rev. Wright was bragging about his "deep connection" to William Ayers?

I missed that.

Do you have a source?

Also: Can you substantiate your suggestion that Rev. Wright has a "deep connection" to Ayers? If the connection really is deep, you will surely have no problem proving it.

TwinSwords
04-29-2008, 01:59 PM
The Dem. nomination has become a spectacle in the OJ Simpson tradition.
Good analogy; and it's not even the Dem nomination generally, but the Wright frenzy in particular. This has been going on for, what? Six weeks? Eight weeks? I've lost track, but for that entire duration the media has pretty much focused on nothing except Rev. Wright.

This is what the media does every four years to destroy the Democratic nominee. I imagine Gore, Kerry, and Dukakis are looking on and feeling great sympathy for Obama.

And what we learned in those past elections is that we're just getting started: The saturation coverage of Rev. Wright won't stop until after the election in November. Things are not going to "go back to normal" and the media will not move on to other topics. They've found their narrative and they will pound on it until Obama is pulp.

This happens every four years.

TwinSwords
04-29-2008, 02:24 PM
Such as his "tangential" Ayers relationship again compared to Obama's relationships with right wingers...we needed a follow-up there by Wallace bringing up what we know about that relationship and then pinning Obama down on which right winger does he have that kind of relationship with. There is NONE.

I'll admit I'm at a disadvantage, here; I don't read any of the lunatic web sites. I don't watch a lot of Fake News, and I don't listen to right-wing talk radio.

So I don't know what you apparently do about Obama's relationship with Ayers. All I know is that Obama and Ayers were both members of the same board (meaningless and proves nothing), and that there was a campaign event at Ayer's house when Obama launched in State Senate campaign.

Can you educate me? Besides that, what is the real nature of the Obama-Ayers relationship which so exceeds the relationship Obama has with Sen. Coburn?

You're obviously quite sure this is a matter of great importance. I wonder if you can explain why. I won't ask you to omit emotion from your response; I realize it's a critical component of your thought process. But I would ask that you at least includes something factual in the mix.

Thanks.

Tao Jones
04-29-2008, 02:51 PM
"He'd have to keep repeating "Florida and Michigan don't matter!", which only serves to stoke grudges against him in key states where he'd have had an uphill battle to begin with."

What about "Florida and Michigan weren't truly represented by the outcomes in the primaries?" I don't think that's too complex an argument for the general public to latch on to. Not only that, it stops a lot of the memes HRC is spreading dead in their tracks. For example, she claims she has actually gained more popular votes in her PA victory speech. Rather than "those votes don't count", "HRC is disregarding the voices of an important segment of Florida and Michigan voters."

But, yeah, like you said Joel... depressing.

Eastwest
04-29-2008, 03:17 PM
Among other things, you've commited the sin of becoming boorishly boring.

Fantastic example of the pot calling the kettle black.

But so nice of you to elevate your vocabulary. It's refreshing. I gather you're taking on board some of BJ's wise counsel.

Maybe there is such a thing as "hope" and "change" after all!

EW

bkjazfan
04-29-2008, 04:08 PM
I wonder what the early apologists on this site for Reverend Wright have to say now that he has exposed himself for being a hateful, egotistical minister who likes who likes to comment on subjects like education, history and others that he knows nothing to litttle about. As I said before there is no need to go to someone with a divinity degree and get information from them on economics, law, and international relations when there are plenty of people in the African American community that have expertise in these areas. At one time that may have been the case but not anymore.

John

bkjazfan
04-29-2008, 05:23 PM
Even Obama has thrown Wright under the bus with a news conference today. Apparently, the reverend's appearance yesterday in Washington, D.C. at the National Press Club was too much for the presidential candidate to stomach. Barak is late to the party but he did arrive.

John

Whatfur
04-29-2008, 05:46 PM
Fantastic example of the pot calling the kettle black.

But so nice of you to elevate your vocabulary. It's refreshing. I gather you're taking on board some of BJ's wise counsel.

Maybe there is such a thing as "hope" and "change" after all!

EW


I believe that would be "hopity, hopity, change, change".

Whatfur
04-29-2008, 06:49 PM
I have already addressed what is common knowledge about Ayers here already in response to a couple different diavlogs starting I believe with the last one betweeon Scher and Carroll. Look it up. Bottom line is they have been close associates, friends, and neighbors for over a decade. The served on a board together for 2 years while also on a couple other different panels at the univerisity. Go re-watch the debate where Obama almost swallowed his tongue trying to answer the question from George S. about Ayers and tell me that he is comfortable with people knowing about their relationship. And yes, Ayers hosted the kick-off fundraiser for Obama's state legislature campaign...I'd say they were pretty tight.

Obama, already dismissed the moral equivilence of the two (Coburn and Ayers) and their actions so I don't need to.

If you are comfortable with your Presidential candidate hanging with someone who use to lead riots, and plants bombs while being unrepentent about those activities and who continues to make highly anti-american statments then Obama is your guy.

A couple links to some wacky blogs (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/29706_More_of_Obamas_Anti-American_Friends)for you that have audio of this great American.

In any case, mark my words; the Ayers relationship already is one more thing in a long line of BAD JUDGEMENTS by Obama...and more will come out of this story...just like more will come out of the Rezko relationship.

All we had to do was look at Obama's Senate voting record to discover he was very left wing, but the more we learn about who he really is we are discovering that "nutjob" may be an appropriate moniker.

breadcrust
04-29-2008, 07:02 PM
Obama shouldn't go Sister Souljah on Wright until after North Carolina.

To the other Obama supporters here, you're acting like a bunch of Democrats. Campaigns are won by people who can display confidence and act as if they're winning when they're getting their asses handed to them. (Think HRC offering Obama the VP-ship. She acts like an (R) who's set on winning.) So instead of responding to attacks on Obama from HRC and her surrogates (during the primary) at Fox, keep harping on her weaknesses (Bosnia, all other claims of "experience," Bill's lessened mental function, her horrendous voice, etc.) Then switch to McCain, because the best way to get through this endless primary is to (1) loudly recognize that Obama is winning, (2) pretend he has no chance of losing, and (3) start harping on how McCain is a crazy old flip-flopper, who pretends to start fights with (R) senators who could easily kill him, who loves the Iraq War, and who probably smells really bad.

Whatfur
04-29-2008, 07:22 PM
"and who probably smells really bad"

Obama I understand smokes up a storm, not to mention doing bong hits with Billy and Bernie... Smokers not only are stupid, and exhibit bad judgement(<--looks like we have a theme going), but they wreak to high heaven.
And Michelle always looks a little sweaty.

Now McCain probably only has an occasional cigar and that is admirable... while we all know his wife has never once sweated. ;o)

breadcrust
04-29-2008, 08:22 PM
To Obama supporters,

As Whatfur has correctly demonstrated, don't get bogged down with your opponent's claims. Focus exclusively on your opponent's weaknesses (even when partly in jest) and avoid all statements that can hurt your guy (McCain is in love with the Iraq War. Loves it. Loves it. Wants it to go on for a hundred years. A million. Just so long as he doesn't have to admit he was wrong.)

Now, I don't know that McCain smells really bad, but he is 71 (that's right, born before penicillin was even used as medicine) which means he's so old that he's actually in Fox News' demographic sweet-spot.

Trevor
04-29-2008, 08:41 PM
Shorter This Diavlog:

Pinkerton: *right-wing talking point*
Tomasky: "I agree!"
<repeat>

Geez.

Whatfur
04-29-2008, 08:51 PM
Breadcrust,

So much for the confidence thing...did you hear Obama stutter his way to throwing the Good Rev under the bus this morning?

The fork has been lifted...if Obama loses Indiana by double digits (sound familiar?) and also loses NC (or wins by less than 5) then the fork can be inserted.

And sorry I need to repeat my dingalinks because I find them rather profound and am shooting for inclusion of at least one of them on that right frame...
Give them a listen...


Has anyone seen Chad? (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10580?in=00:10:39&out=00:10:56)

Superdelegates, I believe, are smarter dem dare bitter, church-goin, gun slingin, regular type delegates. (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10580?in=00:14:29&out=00:14:55)

They call'em the way they see'em and if they would rather not see'em they make them up! (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10580?in=00:12:26&out=00:13:05)

Go Ron Paul!! <---I'm kidding ;o)

bjkeefe
04-29-2008, 09:25 PM
You mean York, not Pinkerton, right?

bjkeefe
04-29-2008, 09:49 PM
pisc:

This allows Senator Obama to completely distance himself from the reverend, and reinforces the crazy old uncle claim, most of us had or have one, thus creating a discount between the ideals advocated by the reverend and Senator Obama's responsibility for having not taken previous action to disavow the ideology. Seems like a two for the price of one to me.

You're looking more and more prescient here, based on the surfing I've done today -- many people, and not just Obama supporters, seem to be acknowledging a clearer separation between Obama and Wright.

Whatfur
04-29-2008, 10:54 PM
Yep! Definately, a clearer separation. Not all good though as now we are finding that his judgement of how Rev. Wright would handle this new found attention on the national scene was wrong and now he has to worry about how the good Rev. will handle this riducule at the hands of his Jr. Senator. I'd worry about that a bit as the good Reverand doesn't seem to me to be one of those "turn the other cheek" Christians. How does he seem to you? It wouldn't be a good thing if he started talking about the fellowship between Obama, himself, and Louis F. while they attended the Million Man March together or something similar.

Nope..Reverand Wright can not have liked reading Obama quoted as saying...

"All it was was a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in truth."

Nope..not gonna like it. ;o)

Over and above the separation though, much of what I have now read are people who cannot decide whether Obama for 23 years has been as ignorantly blind as he wants to portray or whether he wishes us to be.

But...at least you have Hillary.

piscivorous
04-29-2008, 11:02 PM
It seems to have worked on Andrew Sullivan. I mean in 24 hours a 180 to How could Obama support this crank and then another 180 back Senator Obama has redeemed himself. Does anyone on the left still take Mr Sullivan seriously?

handle
04-29-2008, 11:23 PM
Is this your job? If so, how do I get one? I could actually make up some
original neocon rhetoric if you paid me enough. In case I get the gig, who does our camp want to run against, so I can bone up on sound bites?

bjkeefe
04-29-2008, 11:52 PM
Does anyone on the left still take Mr Sullivan seriously?

I do. I don't agree with him on all issues, and I also acknowledge that he sometimes posts before thinking (something which I am happy to say I never do ;^)). But I find him well worth reading, and I think he regularly says smart things.

rgajria
04-30-2008, 04:02 AM
How about a weekly diavlog about Music? Bob and Mickey spoke about music very occasionally in the past and that is where I learned of Regina Spektor and Rosie Thomas. Both were good suggestions.
Recently there was a diavlog between two gentlemen (whose names I cannot remember) that touched on music and nature of popular music.
Others, should suggest more topics so that Bob and his staff get an idea of what regular bloggingheads fans want to hear and see.