Obama has been caught in several "dodging sniper fire" type fabrications, notably his claim that he was conceived because of the Selma march, when he had been alive for 4 years. But more than that, most of his popularity has come from the idea that he is above the typical politics and bickering. But nearly every day now, he feels like he has to defend his honor from little attacks from Hillary, and most of these make him seem petty. The entire Democratic race has been petty bickering over the past month, not unlike the argument between Romney and McCain about who said what when in the Reagan Library debate.
I think him defending himself isn't petty but smart politics. When Kerry tried to ignore the initial swift boat ads it backfired. When Gore didn't attack the falsehoods people were saying about him like trying to accuse him of saying he invented the internet, it backfired. Obama said from the very beginning that he would not let attacks go unanswered, and so far it seems to have been pretty effective. It is certainly smarter than the alternative and watching himself become the next John Kerry.
Of course no one wants to mention the fact that Wright was also a decorated Marine who served two tours of Vietnam while Cheney was getting his 5 deferrals or W was getting drunk and doing blow. I think he has earned the right to criticize America when he sees injustice. But go ahead and take 30 seconds out of 30 years of sermons and distort it for political gain. It's what republicans do.
If anyone used the stuff about Gore inventing the internet as the sole reason to vote against him in the election, they probably shouldn't have been voting in the first place.
OJ was a decorated, hall of fame running back. Does that give him the right to murder two people? Racism on any level can not be tolerated, regardless of one's background. Anti-semitism can not be tolerated, marine or not. Bigotry can not be tolerated, marine or not. Your argument is weak. By the way, what was the highest rank Wright attained in the military? Private first class?
o wow, oj is just like wright don't throw another tantrum like a little b**** when warren jeffs is linked to the muslims because you do that type of crap all the time edit: not muslims but mormons
So racism is tolerable in your book, pgabs, if one has a marine background? Same for Jew-hating and bigotry? Wow.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24016480/ Todd: McCain's path to victory A Republican can win the White House, but first he needs an opponent By Chuck Todd Political Director NBC News updated 12:09 p.m. CT, Wed., April. 9, 2008 WASHINGTON - It is April of 2008, a time when the Republican brand is at an all-time low. And yet somehow, some way, John McCain is hanging in there. He is proving to be perhaps the only electable Republican in the country, short of Colin Powell or the ineligible Arnold Schwarzenegger. Conservatives may not be thrilled with what a McCain presidency means, but if social conservatives care about the makeup of the House and Senate, as well state legislatures and the courts, then they should rally around McCain. They know better than most the importance of controlling the legislative and judicial branches to achieve long-term influence. With McCain representing the Republican brand, even if he were to lose the race he should be able to save a few Senate seats (say 2-3) and a handful of House seats (perhaps 10). The latter could keep the Democrats majority below 250, a reachable number for the GOP in 2010. But this isn't meant to be just a simple lesson in how McCain can cover the spread. This is about looking at his path to victories. The first thing McCain needs is for the Democrats to find a nominee. There's a lot of bad conventional wisdom percolating that this drawn out fight is good for McCain. It isn't... at least not yet. There may be a point where it is good for McCain, say if the fight actually goes all the way to Denver, but short of that, he needs an opponent, badly. Why? A few reasons, not the least of which is finding out where he stands with the voting public. Currently polls show McCain either narrowly ahead or even with both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. It is impressive considering how poorly the GOP, and specifically the president, are viewed by the public. But it is a faux lead. If the de facto Democratic nominee is clear within the next 4-6 weeks, that person will see a poll bounce. And according to GOP pollster Steve Lombardo, it could be one heck of a bounce, like post-convention. He anticipates the Democratic candidate will move up 10 points once the primary race is over. That will be a jolting set of numbers for the McCain camp to absorb. They ought to be prepping the media now, because if they wait for the inevitable overreaction of the pundit class, the bounce will take on more importance. The initial bounce will set the polling numbers – the floor and ceiling – for the Democrats, who clearly have the generic advantage this cycle. Those parameters will dictate the morale within the GOP base. If McCain’s is hanging in, behind by 10 or so points, then it is clear he will have a shot. If the bounce pushes the Democratic nominee to as much as a 15 point lead, it may be very demoralizing to the GOP. The sooner McCain can absorb this inevitable negative poll news, the longer he has to recover. Getting the bounce out of the way isn’t the only reason McCain needs the Democrats’ race to end as soon as possible. It is also because he will run two very different campaigns depending on whom he faces. He will either be the steady hand in uncertain times vs. Obama, or he'll be the breath of fresh air and openness in a campaign against Clinton. As someone said to NBC's David Gregory, McCain will take up the space left by the defeated Democrat. From a message standpoint, those are big differences. It is not easy to advance both, now, at the same time. McCain is trying, but ultimately, being able to refine one line of attack is a must, and that can't happen without a clear opponent. In addition to message, geographically the battleground will be different depending on who he’s running against. If Clinton is the foe, McCain will be using a target map that looks very similar to the one George Bush pursued in '00 and '04. The emphasis will be on the Midwest and West, as he may be able to pick off a few blue states like Oregon or Wisconsin. If Obama is the foe, McCain's geographic emphasis is likely to shift East to the Rust Belt, Michigan and Pennsylvania in particular, and even to the Northeast. There are credible paths to victory for McCain regardless of his opponent. But the easier path – or the more comfortable one for McCain – appears to be a campaign against Clinton. First, a Clinton victory in the primary would probably not take place until well into the summer, giving McCain some time to stay competitive on fundraising. Second, a Clinton primary win would give McCain an opportunity to win over younger voters (whom he connected with in '00) and affluent, white male independents (who have been gravitating slowly to Obama for some time). Third, McCain's campaign sweet spot over the years has been when he’s the "change" candidate. Despite the (R) next to his name, he can run against Hillary's last name and claim the change mantle. It will not be easy, but it will be easier than claiming that mantle against Obama. So how can he beat Obama? He will have to do well in the Rust Belt and dominate the economic issue in a way he's never done before. McCain could fix some of his problems connecting on the economy by his choice of a running mate, and there may not be a better "conventional" pick than Mitt Romney. The former Massachusetts governor could help the ticket immediately in the two blue states of Michigan and New Hampshire. And he could potentially offset Obama's strength in the Rocky Mountain west with a surge of Mormons coming out in Nevada and Colorado in particular. Then there is the help Romney could provide on McCain’s message, assuming the problem-solving, job-creation Romney is the running mate rather than the born-again social conservative Romney. McCain can win, no matter his opponent. But there’s the rub. He needs an opponent. © 2008 MSNBC Interactive URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24016480/
BTW Jorge, you do know that OJ was acquitted right? Or are you being judgemental are racist in your assumption of guilt?
I also like the way he is so condescending of his rank, because we know trader was a navy seal or something.
You are beyond hope if you can't see that Jeremiah Wright is just as racist as David Duke or any other racist. Listen to his railings against 'rich white people', 'garlic nosed Italians', Jews, on down the line. But then again, it's hard to talk sense into people that think OJ was innocent. Wow. It's really amazing how a lot of blacks defend other blacks, regardless of the crime. The polarization is instant when a black person is accused of something -- think OJ, Kobe, Kwame Kilpatrick, Michael Jackson, Jeremiah Wright, etc.
what crime did wright commit, what does he have to do with oj how is calling rich white people, rich white people racist. what did he say about jews?
now I'm black? You're making no sense jorge. BTW I wasn’t defending OJ, just pointing out the fact that he was acquitted.
Good point. What I was trying to say was that even if Obama had been taught Islamic principles in school, it was only for a brief period of time, when he was not raised a Muslim before or after that experience. I too was taught many life lessons in Sunday school when I was young and, like you, they have stuck with me. However, I believe this is because I have spent many years after those Sunday school lessons attending church as a practicing Christian. However, if I'd not been raised a Christian after those early Sunday school years, I don't believe that the ideals presented there would have nearly as much resonance. I would say that the same goes for Obama. Even if he had been taught Islamic ideals (which, as reports say, he was not), it was only for two years in his life. The man is a Christian by choice, not by his heritage. I think that is admirable, no matter what you have to say his religious associations. Some people (T_J, texxx, RRNYC) will try to diminish this no matter what is said. If you refute their statements about Obama being taught in an Islamic school, they counter with Jeremiah Wright rhetoric. If you counter that by saying that Obama and Wright are both Christians, you'll hear about Obama's supposedly shady past. It's lose-lose with them.
The funny thing is that if Hillary somehow get the nod you know her campaign would filter Bush's 2000 stuff back into the media/public mind. Stuff like this will suddenly reappear: February 17, 2000 ESSAY / By WILLIAM SAFIRE Political 'God's World' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Related Articles Op-Ed Columns Archive Forum Join a Discussion on William Safire -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WASHINGTON -- Picking up an armload of mail early this week, I noticed an unfamiliar magazine in my box. "World" was its title; full color, slick paper, 38 pages. On the cover was a glowering, threatening, almost satanic John McCain. The headline was "The McCain Craze . . . a campaign platform that should give Republicans pause." Inside was a hatchet job. On tax policy, the critic wrote, "He makes his case with liberal, even Marxist, terminology." On campaign finance reform, "McCain would essentially suspend the First Amendment for 60 days prior to any federal election." On Social Security, "he goes beyond even Franklin D. Roosevelt." Unnamed detractors call him "a calculating and conniving politician." Then World gets nastily personal. The writer notes how, 20 years ago, "the 43-year-old former P.O.W. quickly fell in love with the 25-year-old cheerleader. She was rich, attractive and well connected." He won election "despite charges of carpetbagging and buying the election." Cindy McCain's family stock, we are told, "pays her more than $1 million in dividends, and she owns more than $1 million worth of stock in Anheuser-Busch." McCain, charges the professedly "God-centered" magazine, "has not attacked alcohol companies as he has the tobacco industry" because he is "awash in beer money." Even more scandalous: "Yet for all his dependence on his wife's money, Mr. McCain doesn't appear to be a particularly attentive husband." To get a barbiturate fix after an illness, Mrs. McCain stole pain relievers: "The offense was serious enough to merit jail time," but she got off, and her husband "claimed not to know about Cindy's addiction. . . ." With that sly "claimed," the writer implies that the senator did know, did not care, and is now lying about it. The morally disapproving author of this repugnant anti-McCain campaign document is Bob Jones IV, son of the present head of Bob Jones University. That is the educational institution prohibiting interracial dating that offered its facilities to George W. Bush to launch his political campaign in South Carolina -- and pointedly did not invite his opponent. The Bob Jones connection is not the only tie that binds the Bush campaign to this attack on a fellow Republican in contravention of Ronald Reagan's "Eleventh Commandment." The editor of World magazine is Marvin Olasky, a professor of journalism at the University of Texas in Austin. He is the revered intellectual guru of Governor Bush and an author of "compassionate conservatism." This caused me to wonder: What caused this magazine, edited by a Bush adviser who says he recuses himself, and with a Bob Jones scion as its star reporter, and featuring the sinister portrayal of McCain on its cover, to appear in my mailbox a few days before the South Carolina primary? In tiny type is the source: God's World Publications Inc., of Asheville, N.C. The marketing manager says that -- by sheer coincidence -- somebody decided that this was the one issue that would be sent gratis to all 535 members of Congress and 130 moving and shaking members of the media in Washington, all of whom apparently needed to get God's World's word at this moment about McCain, that "conniving politician" and not "particularly attentive husband." God's World, a not-for-profit organization with a turnover of about $18 million a year, receives tax-deductible contributions under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. According to Joel Belz, the publisher: "We cannot endorse candidates or legislation. In 58 years, we have never backed any candidate." As a card-carrying right-wing seditionist, I defend God's World's right to excoriate any candidate, fairly or not. But when its editor is Bush's trusted Austin adviser; when its reporter bears the name of the school being abused as a Bush tool in the campaign; when its not-for-profit's funds are used to print, illustrate and distribute a hatchet job on a political opponent to a list of officials and media biggies on a primary election eve -- then such backdoor backing of candidate Bush strikes me as religio-political sleaze in action. http://www.mediatransparency.org/reprints/olaskyworldsafire.htm
Rimmy, no one (who was paying the slightest attention) disputes that McCain was subjected to a smear job of the highest order by the 2000 campaign of Bush/Rove to get George the GOP nomination. In my opinion, parts of the smear job skirted the law or broke it, and McCain was understandably livid about it. I've been disappointed that the man has been courting the same people who delighted in dragging him and his family through the mud 8 years ago. It shows McCain to be willing to do anything, put up with any affront to his honor and dignity (I had always assumed that meant a great deal to the man), to get the GOP nomination. It also tells me that I shouldn't be surprised if he stoops to the Karl Rove style of campaigning in the Fall, most likely through surrogates, if he thinks he needs to in order to win. This isn't the John McCain a lot of people think they're supporting. It is someone else. Having said that, what does it have to do with Hillary Clinton? Last time I checked, she wasn't having her campaign run by Karl Rove and hasn't been nearly as negative as the last several GOP campaigns. She's run a tough campaign, and if Senator Obama wins, it'll be good for him. He'll face much worse in the general election and should be prepared. Whatever he has in his closet is better out now than in October. Trim Bush.
