Obama didn't pander, before he did

I don't know about you, but when I saw the end of this add, I really did start laughing out loud after the ending:

Shorter Obama ad: 'Obama's different on taxes, he tells the truth and doesn't pander.... wanna tax cut?'

Is this true?

James Pickens is typical of those who have been inspired by the black senator from Illinois. A reformed crack cocaine dealer, he is now peddling Obama T-shirts. Mr Pickens, 50, has served three prison terms totalling 13 years, but vowed to change his ways after hearing Mr Obama speak. He said: "I never voted for a president before. He's for change, which is something I need in my life. Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling T-shirts."
Obama got a big Sunday bump on the Gallup daily tracking poll to lead Clinton by 3 percent now. Heath Shuler coming out for Clinton on Wed.

Tags: Election 2008 (all tags)

Comments

169 Comments

So why did you laugh Jerome?

I agree with him. Hillary IS pandering. Did you just see the new CBS news poll? The majority of Americans agree with Barack.  

I don't understand why you hate him so much.  I like him even more for admitting that voting for the tax cut in IL was a mistake and he has learned from his mistakes. I wish I could say the same about Hillary when it comes to war.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-04 02:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Jerome-
The estimate is that the gas tax cut might save people 35$.  Doesn't the difference between 35$ and 1,000$ seem legitimate?  Also, the 1,000 is straight up, and not presented as something it's not.  

What was so funny?  The pander "hypocrisy"?

by chrispy 2008-05-04 02:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Agreed - and saying that all tax cuts is the same is ridiculous. A gas tax cut that would go straight into the oil companies' pockets, or a tax cut for middle class americans - I realize it's never that simple, but c'mon! You act like there's no difference!

by T B J 2008-05-04 03:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I dont see how its disingenuous of Obama if he voted for this legislation before, saw that it didnt work, and now opposes it. But of course, in Jerome's biased world, this is somehow another indictment on Obama. Hit man strikes again!

by AC4508 2008-05-04 05:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I'm with him on the gas tax.  But what's this $1000 he's talking about, and how does he plan to pay for it?  Just more federal debt to pass off to the next generation?

by lilnev 2008-05-04 03:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I can't give you a definitive answer, but the Bush Administration has given so many ridiculous tax breaks to the wealthy, big business, etc., that I'm  sure Obama can find enough to roll back to come up with $1000 a family.

Oh, and ending the Glorious Occupation will leave us with extra cash as well.

by CrazyDrumGuy 2008-05-04 05:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

There's a new poll out by CBS. Barack is leading Hillary by 12 points and McCain by 11.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-04 02:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Heh.  The original line: "Reality has a liberal bias." is one of my all-time favorites.

I approve your usage of it. :)

by RussTC3 2008-05-04 03:03PM | 0 recs
His Indiana speech tonight did the same

He spoke after Clinton, and I figured he was going to harp on her gas tax holiday.  Instead, deep in his soporific speech, he started blathering about tax cuts!!!

by internetstar 2008-05-04 06:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

LOL Gotta love how after Bambi panders the Barack supporters start cherry picking polls and triangulating away from the subject. Hey guys, guess what? Major network polls, and large national polls that aren't trackers typically aren't kind to Hillary, but even if you want to make an argument for validity, I think based on every other tracker and McCain V. Obama and Clinton v. Obama poll, those numbers are outliers.

by zcflint05 2008-05-04 02:39PM | 0 recs
UM

Did you miss Gallup today?

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-04 03:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Dude, what's to cherry pick.  Polls were important three days ago.  No, they were EVERYTHING a few days ago.  They were not everything when Obama had a 10 point lead.  If you're going to run with polls telling breathlessly telling us the tide has turned, then when those polls turn you are obligated (if you're honest) to tell us the tide has turned again.  Of course that would be silly, but it is fun to point out that poll-touters of a few days ago have suddenly lost the ability to type.

by niksder 2008-05-04 03:20PM | 0 recs
Yeah,

I think that saying that Obama's support was tanking on the front page the other day was a bit much.

by wasder 2008-05-04 05:18PM | 0 recs
Bambi?

People talk plenty of smack on this site, a lot of it not really helpfpul.

What's up with the name calling?

by TL 2008-05-04 03:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Bambi?

A few have advanced to stage two.

by username3 2008-05-04 03:39PM | 0 recs
Shorter version:

'Obama's different on taxes, he tells the truth and doesn't pander.... wanna meaningful tax cut?'

by LawStudent 2008-05-04 02:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Shorter version:

A flat $1,000 to the middle class. What constitutes middle class these days?  How about the poor? Nothing for them? No details provided... seems like major pandering to me.

by JavaCityPal 2008-05-04 09:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Shorter version:

you can't cut taxes for people who are exempt from them.

There is a minimum wage requirement on income taxes.  How can you cut taxes to people who, by virtue of not making enough income, don't pay any?

by DawnG 2008-05-04 09:29PM | 0 recs
maybe hillary should

just give 35 bucks to everyone who will vote for her.......call it a loan.

by citizendave 2008-05-04 02:41PM | 0 recs
Re: maybe hillary should

That wouldn't be the true parallel. She really ought to just give Americans $35 limit Shell, BP, or ExxonMobil credit cards. Oh, and sabotage the transportation budget somehow.

by Addison 2008-05-04 04:21PM | 0 recs
Re: maybe hillary should

Interesting tactic.  If Obama will give me $1000, I might vote for him one day after all.

by Montague 2008-05-04 04:53PM | 0 recs
Re: maybe hillary should

You should really listen to her explanation of her short-term plan and her long-term on oil/gas taxes and prices.

When you listen only to Obama's twist on it, you get a very distorted version of the truth.

by JavaCityPal 2008-05-04 09:25PM | 0 recs
Re: maybe hillary should

i formulated my opinion of the gas tax thing from "every single economist" out there....not from obama's retorts.....thank you very much.

by citizendave 2008-05-05 02:10AM | 0 recs
Re: maybe hillary should

Hey rocket scientist.  I hate to break it to you, but as much as Hillary tells you "I am going to lower gas prices for you."  She can't.  Not with gas tax cuts, and not with anything else.  You know why?  Because oil is a commodity.  Its prices are set by market forces.  It doesn't matter if Jesus Christ himself were President, he couldn't change oil prices either.  

When demand is greater than supply, prices will go up.  So unless Hillary can magically create more gasoline, or magically force people to stop burning gasoline, the prices will continue to go up.  Welcome to life.  Gasoline prices have been held down artificially in this country for so many years.  Much of the world has been paying $4 a gallon for years.  Get used to it, because it isn't going to change any time soon.

by belicheat 2008-05-05 06:22AM | 0 recs
Why do you not like politicians learning from...

their mistakes?  He said on the MTP interview that he made a mistake when he voted for the Illinois gas tax holiday.  From that experience, he learned that it doesn't work.  This much better than a politician decrying something and then calling for it as Hillary has done with the gast tax holiday.  In 2000, she panned the idea and went after Lazio on his support of a gas tax holiday.  Now, she supports it.  Isn't that greater evidence of flip-flopping and pandering?

by nklein 2008-05-04 02:42PM | 0 recs
Obama the Pander Bear

Ah hem...he voted for a gas tax holiday THREE times. His opposition is pandering because he needs to find a purposeful gap issue with Hillary to oppose her on. Obviously, it must have worked the first two times if he voted for it again and again...so what's the deal?

by zcflint05 2008-05-04 02:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama the Pander Bear

Why? Would it have had to have worked instantly or not at all?

by RLMcCauley 2008-05-04 02:53PM | 0 recs
If you're gonna argue at least get it right

he voted for it three times, it finally passed, they watched to see the effects, saw that it was negligible and that the highways fund was going into deficit so when it came up for renewal he voted against it.

by grass 2008-05-04 03:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama the Pander Bear

yeah he voted for it 3 times but it was only passed the last time and when it was passed he learned from it  and voted against in his state

what good is experience if you don't learn from it ?

You think Hillary has  experience but why does she not listen to her own economic advisors?

if your a typical Hillary supporter and uneducated you cannot answer my question

If you are a true Hillary supporter and look to her as a champion for the Middle class you would answer my questions

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 03:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama the Pander Bear

I refuse to have a conversation with someone who believes that "typical Hillary supporters" are uneducated. It reeks of elitism. TR'ed.

by zcflint05 2008-05-04 03:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama the Pander Bear

Best time to cut and run is when you are losing...

by zadura 2008-05-04 03:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama the Pander Bear

well do you disagree with what I said
about a TRUE  Hillary supporter ??

the Educated people that Know Hillary's health plan is better then Obama's

I just want people to answer me that will not insult me and tr rate if I have a opposing view

I don't want idiots that justs TR people and have no contructive comments

you should not take offense to that because you are a real supporter of Hillary and I know you can answer my question

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 03:16PM | 0 recs
OK, well

I'm an Obama supporter who agrees with the thrust of your post, and I TR'd you.  the

if your a typical Hillary supporter and uneducated you cannot answer my question
is just horrible, and is the textbook definition of a troll: you've completely dismissed half the people on this site with a mean-spirited insult.  That phrase is why people are TR'ing you, not because they disagree with the rest of your thesis, which is pretty reasonable.  A demeaning, classist remark like this destroys your credibility with pretty much anyone who's paying attention.  

'X are uneducated and so we must disregard them' is not a statement a true liberal would ever make.  

PS: I normally try hard not to complain about this kind of thing, but  irony compels me to point out that you made a juvenile grammatical error while you were bashing the uneducated.

by semiquaver 2008-05-04 04:38PM | 0 recs
Re: OK, well

hey I was sleep deprived!!!!

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 05:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama the Pander Bear

Especially as "wellinformed" has serious problems with writing.

by Montague 2008-05-04 04:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama the Pander Bear

I had miswritten

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 05:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama the Pander Bear

I don't know about "elitist" but it's certainly a prick thing to say.

but I'm just burned out by the "elitist" label.  Heck I'm burned out by the whole namecalling BS on both sides.

Y'all need to grow up.

by DawnG 2008-05-04 09:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama the Pander Bear

You are only listening to Obama's spin and excuses on this issue, obviously.

Take time to listen to Hillary, and why she isn't taking the advice of the economists right now. We've spent the past 7+ years listening to the expert economists, and I don't like where they've taken us. They speak, and we all, including our government, let reality roll into their predictions. Hillary, as a leader, will tell them what outcome she wants to see for the country, and they can tell her how to make it happen.

I keep a quote hanging in my office, "Those who say it can't be done should not interrupt the people who are doing it."

Everytime I hear Obama say something cannot be done, he is displaying an absence of the optimism it takes to effect absolute change.

Understanding the power of the president is a pretty good idea for those who feel they are qualified to apply for the job.

by JavaCityPal 2008-05-04 09:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

The difference of course being that tax breaks really do help people, whereas Clinton's tax "holiday" would end up saving people almost no money, would increase profits for oil companies, and would encourage more gas consumption instead of less.

But hey, I guess when you're delusional you can find anything amusing.  GREAT JOB!!!

by KevinT 2008-05-04 02:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

TR for personal insult.

by zcflint05 2008-05-04 02:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I don't really think saying someone is being delusional is a personal insult, but I apologize regardless.

by KevinT 2008-05-04 02:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

TR for TR abuse.

by Brannon 2008-05-04 03:31PM | 0 recs
uprated for TR abuse

by Rumarhazzit 2008-05-04 03:53PM | 0 recs
Re: uprated for TR abuse

TR'd for uprating the troll who I TR'd but should have HR'd... crap, my "Rate All" button is broken!

Seriously though, and this is no way only applicable to this thread, sometimes the rating on this blog gets out of control

by CrazyDrumGuy 2008-05-04 05:52PM | 0 recs
For your comment to work...

that would be "he pandered before he didn't."  I understand you might have some problem with linear time, so I just wanted to correct the record.

by nklein 2008-05-04 02:46PM | 0 recs
Sorry, didn't mean to get so snooty n/t

by nklein 2008-05-04 02:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Yea, see I pandered to ya.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-04 02:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

From the new CBS poll, about the gas tax:

The poll also asked voters about their opinion of lifting the federal gas tax over the summer, a proposal supported by McCain and Clinton, but not by Obama. Forty-nine percent think lifting the tax is a bad idea, while 45 percent approve of the plan. Most Republicans approve of the idea and most independents disapprove, while Democrats are divided. Americans are also divided on this issue by income: Americans making under $30,000 a year approve of a gas tax "holiday" for the summer, but most Americans making more do not.

The poll also found that many are skeptical of the motives of the public figures that support the idea of a temporary lifting of the federal gasoline tax: seven in 10 think they support the measure mostly to help themselves politically. Even most Americans who approve of the idea think so.

In this poll, Clinton is the candidate most viewed as pandering: Just 34 percent think she says what she believes, while nearly two in three believe she says what people want to hear. For both Obama and McCain, just over half say they say what he believes and four in 10 think they say what voters want to hear.

by KevinT 2008-05-04 03:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

"Obama got a big Sunday bump on the Gallup daily tracking poll to lead Clinton by 3 percent now."

Poll shows Obama 49-Clinton 45.  Wouldn't that be 4 percent?

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-04 04:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

So, a gas tax cut that she is using simply to score points and might just be pocketed by oil companies and will hardly help anyone is the same as a real tax cut for $1000 that will help middle class families struggling, is payed for, and its benefits are backed up by actual economists. Guess what $1000 > $.67 for 3 months.

The fact that you can't see the vast difference just shows how far your true bias goes Jerome.  There is nothing unsound or unseemly about a middle class tax cut, but this gas tax is considered a sham by everyone save Hillary and McCain.  I've read you for years and your much better than this, Jerome.

by GobBluth 2008-05-04 02:45PM | 0 recs
Policy differences

Clinton's proposal will do absolutely zero for working Americans, inflated energy costs or the economy. Obama's middle class tax cut together with his tax package will help working Americans and the economy.

Not a difficult choice to make.

by hankg 2008-05-04 02:49PM | 0 recs
tone

Is there a reason you take the tone you do in your posts?

by map 2008-05-04 02:46PM | 0 recs
Oh come on Jerome

you know better.

Hillary Clinton copies a plan from John McCain that would save people 35 bucks. Obama copies a plan from almost every Democratic politician that would save people 1,000 bucks.

35 bucks is not going to do anything to help. 1,000 bucks will.  

Also. What's so bad about drug dealers getting inspired and changing there ways?

by Populista 2008-05-04 02:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh come on Jerome

I couldn't even figure out what that blockquote was even doing there.  Pretty random.

by fogiv 2008-05-04 04:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh come on Jerome

Hillary has already said that she would work to return the tax rates to what they were during Bill's administration.  

by Montague 2008-05-04 05:01PM | 0 recs
What was the point of the last part?

Why not ask the paper that reported it? This isn't the Obama campaign claiming that they changed this guy's life around.

This is a second rate troll type diary, down to the title. How far Jerome has fallen.

 

by highgrade 2008-05-04 02:47PM | 0 recs
Re: What was the point of the last part?

Its your daily management endorsed Obama attacks. I think its his goal to be a stereotypical foil for Kos.

by Lost Thought 2008-05-04 03:04PM | 0 recs
it's amazing

I'll be honest, I expect a difference in style/analysis between the user Diaries and the front page. Maybe it's unfair to have lower expectations, but the fact that anyone can post a diary - no matter what your objectives are - IMO is a good reason to have those expectations. Armstrong has now officially entered Diary hack-dom.    

by highgrade 2008-05-04 03:25PM | 0 recs
Re: it's amazing

Not so highgrade, are you.

by dembluestates 2008-05-05 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

And where was the "low road attack?" I think she has launched quite a number, but I also think it's disengenuous to say that in an ad and then not give any examples.

by Nathan Empsall 2008-05-04 02:47PM | 0 recs
"typical" - that's an amazing find

Elitists, or tee-shirt peddlers.  At least it made me laugh.  The journalist seems to be serious though.

by John DE 2008-05-04 02:48PM | 0 recs
Re: "typical" - that's an amazing find

Me too, people cannot take a joke around here, they need to lighten up.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-04 02:56PM | 0 recs
I'm going through your book. Interesting stuff.

I wonder though which Democratic candidate seems to be operating in a manner most consistent with what you put forward.

Did you make a post about that some time in the past?

by RLMcCauley 2008-05-04 03:06PM | 0 recs
Re: "typical" - that's an amazing find

A joke might be better received if not given with a mean spirited and childish delivery.

by map 2008-05-04 03:18PM | 0 recs
Re: "typical" - that's an amazing find

Yes well, you can say/do anything so long as you end it with "lighten up, it's a joke."

by highgrade 2008-05-04 05:00PM | 0 recs
The Stealth in Hillary's Gas plan

A) Remove the gas tax for 3 months
B) pay for that with a windfalls profit tax on oil companies.

Essentially, regardless of whether or not consumers actually get significant relief, whether its 35$ or 50$, what this plan enables us Democrats to do is keep that windfalls profit tax in place after the summer removal of the gas tax is removed. Smart politically, and a smart plan against big oil in Washington D.C.? I think so. I agree that there won't be much significant relief, but there would finally be a way to dip into that deep resevoir of Oil company profits - and that's something I always support.

by KainIIIC 2008-05-04 02:51PM | 0 recs
Re: The Stealth in Hillary's Gas plan

Bush will veto any windfall profits tax.

by RLMcCauley 2008-05-04 02:54PM | 0 recs
Re: The Stealth in Hillary's Gas plan

Then allow the Republicans to vote against it and have it as a wedge issue a la S-CHIP, being tied to big oil and voting against lower gas prices don't seem to be very popular outside of the Exxon headquarters.

by KainIIIC 2008-05-04 02:57PM | 0 recs
Re: The Stealth in Hillary's Gas plan

So pass the tax cut knowing you'd lose the windfall tax? That's not smart.

by RLMcCauley 2008-05-04 03:01PM | 0 recs
Re: The Stealth in Hillary's Gas plan

Didn't Clinton say she planned on spending the windfall profits tax on alternative energy technologies already?  It can't offset the gas tax if it's already spent on other things.

Also, regarding this being called "Hilary's gas plan": people, please don't give any credit, or any blame, to Hilary for this gas tax cut proposal.  It was McCain's stupid idea in the first place, and if it wasn't for him, Hilary wouldn't have come out with this proposal at all.  She copied it, and just put a little Dem twist on it without thinking it through.  

She does deserve blame however for doing a "me-too" with McCain's proposal.  She should recognize any Republican proposal should be treated with suspicion, not that it's great for America or a political winner.  

by PeterB 2008-05-04 03:09PM | 0 recs
Re: The Stealth in Hillary's Gas plan

So stealthy she'll never ever get it passed with Bus as president. What guile! What a plan!

by Addison 2008-05-04 04:17PM | 0 recs
Bus is my new nickname for Bush...

...heh.

by Addison 2008-05-04 04:18PM | 0 recs
moving the goal posts

I hope this isn't what the Clinton campaign is putting out as why we should support the "holiday." First it was to give relief to tax payers. When every economist, from the Heritage Foundation to Krugman says that is bunk, it now becomes a wedge issue to beat the GOP over the head.  

by highgrade 2008-05-04 05:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

The problem is Hillary is running out of superdelagates.  She needs 75-80% of the remaining
SDs.  Jerome, it's just not happening.

So we're stuck with Obama, for better or worse.

by mikelow1885 2008-05-04 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Obama doesn't have enough delegates so we aren't stuck with him yet thank god and if somehow we are stuck with him as a nominee he will never be President and we will be stuck with McCain and stuck in Iraq

by rossinatl 2008-05-04 02:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Will you vote for Obama if he's the nominee?

by RLMcCauley 2008-05-04 03:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Nope..not in one million years.

That's all we need is Barry the Corrupt as our 'progressive' President. Far, far better to have McSame in there flying the 'conservative' flag.

Both sides of the aisle are bought and paid for and Barry's just the latest corporate tool to arrive wearing 'prog' clothing. Things are going to get very much worse before the populace realizes the scam being run on them....

Let's not have a Faux Democrat as President when that happens....

One Carter was enough.

by Pericles 2008-05-04 03:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I think you took a wrong turn on your way to redstate.com. You want the second door on the right.

by Brannon 2008-05-04 03:35PM | 0 recs
his name is Barack not Barry

Show some respect

stop Calling him Barry how would you like it if somebody twisted your name and gave you a nickname  like  uhhhhhh Testicals!!!!??

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 03:51PM | 0 recs
Re: his name is Barack not Barry

It's not exactly "twisting" his name.  When he lived in Indonesia and Hawaii, he went as "Barry."  He later decided to go as Barack instead of Barry.  However, I do agree with your overall point.  It's completely disrespectful to call him by a name other than what he asks people to call him.

by jturn17 2008-05-04 06:25PM | 0 recs
Re: his name is Barack not Barry

I agree with this sentiment, which is why -- as much as I think she is a worthless waste of space in the Senate -- I cringe when people call Sen. Dole "Liddy." She hates the name, but practically everyone uses it.

Those of us in the Democrat Party need to be more polite about these things...

by alvernon 2008-05-04 10:03PM | 0 recs
"One Carter is enough"

good lord...

by ab03 2008-05-04 04:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I'm torn on whether this is a zero or a one.  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, what kind of Democrat are you?  

from this post a few days ago

Users who are excessively bashing the Democratic Party, or being Republican trolls, will be banned.
I'd say the shoe fits.

by semiquaver 2008-05-04 04:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Well I wasn't asking you but I assume you're fine with McCain then?

by RLMcCauley 2008-05-04 05:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Let me ask you, then, if you vote for McCain because Obama doesn't meet your definition of "progressive," do you feel comfortable with the weight of another four years (at least) of dead American soldiers on your shoulders?

This is what it comes down to: a vote for McCain is a vote to let American troops die in an Iraqi civil war.

by CrazyDrumGuy 2008-05-04 05:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Ask yourself this question since by being a Barry supporter, his given name which he changed in answer to the low-info folk up thread, you clearly support this member of the 'Democrat' Party is that not correct?

Is she not an advocate for Barry. If she wanted, the troops would be loading onto transports right now.

Let's look at it another way. Barry has said that he will bring the troops home when 'the proper plans/groundwork/yadda and yadda have been done....' or something like that. Sounds like 'More of the Same' to me. Hey, you have 'faith' I do not.

There are big reasons why the troops are not coming home soon and they have very little to do with who will be in the White House.

The have everything to do with the Barry Wing of the 'Democrat' Party.

by Pericles 2008-05-13 04:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

We're stuck in Iraq for better or worse for some time to come, thanks in no small part to Senator Clinton's support for the war, so I'm voting for someone who opposed it from the beginning; it's always been my issue, and to see opposition to the war turned into a reason to support Senator Clinton is to pass right through the looking glass.

Obama is as electable as Hillary Clinton's supporters will let him be; he will be the nominee, so it is time to move forward.  
 

by realcountrymusic 2008-05-04 05:01PM | 0 recs
CBS/NYT poll: Obama REBOUNDS!!!

I noticed something was up with the upswing in the gallup poll and rasmussen poll the last couple of days.

Perhaps, Obama is getting his mojo back!

Well another poll is showing that: The new CBS/NYT poll

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/0 4/opinion/polls/main4069259.shtml

by puma 2008-05-04 02:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

LOL

Where is that quote again from this week when Obama promises to stay positive?  

The best way to get away with murder is to accuse your opponent first!

Classic tactic of the narcissistic personality disorder sufferers.  

by BPK80 2008-05-04 02:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

The colloquialism for it is 'Rovian'...

by Pericles 2008-05-04 03:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Mmmm, I suppose that would be true.

The comparison between Obama and Bush II is overwhelming at this point.  Extreme wing of party, cloaked in false promises of coming together and being a unifier.  Cultlike following.  They both want to win by not counting votes in Florida.  

by BPK80 2008-05-04 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

That's amusing, but 'extreme', 'false promises', 'cultlike' are all highly subjective and loaded terms which any neutral third party could easily use to descrbe HRC as well.  Your comparison is kind of like the Lincoln/Kennedy thing: think about something long enough with a fixed conclusion in mind and you can connect any two dots in the unverse.



And Hillary fully supported the decision to strip Florida's delegates until it was disadvantageous for her.

by semiquaver 2008-05-04 05:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Well based on your own dismissal of pattern based reasoning, we could just as easily pretend that Obama is mainstream, sincere in his sweeping promises for change and capability to deliver this Washington revolution, and his followers are independent mavericks, impenetrable to groupthink.  

Matter of perspective I suppose.  I'll go with my own.  

by BPK80 2008-05-04 05:30PM | 0 recs
'Pattern Based Reasoning'--

Isn't that the definition of 'Stereotype'?

by semiquaver 2008-05-04 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: 'Pattern Based Reasoning'--

Sure.  If you'd like to posit that an inconsistent man who makes vague and unrealistic promises of revolutionary political change fits my stereotype of a "charlatan," feel free.  

by BPK80 2008-05-04 08:06PM | 0 recs
Re: 'Pattern Based Reasoning'--

mojo'd:  disagree, but that was a pretty good comeback.

by semiquaver 2008-05-04 10:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I like this little bit from the rick pearson of the chicago trib: http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/p olitics/blog/2008/05/clinton_cites_no_ec onomists_fo.html

In an interview on ABC's This Week, Sen. Hillary Clinton couldn't name any economic experts who support her call to suspend federal gasoline taxes and finally cast opponents to her plan as coming from an "elite" mindset that has done little for the working class voters who she is actively cultivating.

what the hell is she talking about? She's completely lost her mind. She's framing this in ridiculous fashion!

by alex100 2008-05-04 02:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Did the article really refer to her as "actively cultivating" the working class voters?

That sounds somewhat devious - if not, uh, elitist.

by Sumo Vita 2008-05-04 06:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

and this from the same article:

Clinton also contended she never said rival Sen. Barack Obama didn't have the credentials to be commander in chief--even though she told reporters in March that only she and likely Republican nominee John McCain had crossed the "commander in chief threshold."

it appears that she might also be a serial liar and one that props up the GOP candidate and tears down our probable nominee.

by alex100 2008-05-04 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

At this point, I would support her even more if she did that.

by zcflint05 2008-05-04 03:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

you would support her even more for lying? or building up the GOP candidate while tearing down the Democrat?

either way you answer, I find it very strange.

by alex100 2008-05-04 03:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

The fact that Hillary is still pushing this idea is mind boggling.  No economist has endorsed it and everything thinks it's a bad idea.

It's probably why Obama is rising in the polls again.

Who's showing the better judgement here?  Someone who admits a mistake, learns from it and is against this crazy idea or someone who has previously attacked someone for supporting the idea that she is now supporting?

by chewie5656 2008-05-04 03:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Jerome, serious question- are you being paid by the Hillary campaign?  Can you definitively say that you are not being paid?

Because lately your posts have become so short sighted and biased that I find them laughable. Your candidate is an admitted panderer.  And she doesn't think much of the 'PhD' types who tell her that the gas tax holiday is a terrible idea.  That sounds an awful like some other president I know.

by bradical 2008-05-04 03:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Don't get out much do ya, pal. Many in the threads elsewhere are starting to compare Barry with Mr. Decider both given every advantage and now arrogant enough to believe they were fukin' born on third. People are asking what planet Barry's on. His understanding of Americans, white ones, never very good as his books show has turned into almost caricature.

The primary race has come down to whether The Magic Man's wholly fabricated persona as Senator 'Hope' disintegrates  before the convention.

Gotta love the transition don't ya? First it was , 'Yes we can!' and now it's,

'No she can't....'

Nice.
.

by Pericles 2008-05-04 03:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

first of all your post is way out of line

second I gaurantee you he has a better understanding of white americans then you do
you forget he is half white ?  so his family is white. By your comments you have shown the lack of understanding you have for white americans based on your close minded comments

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 03:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I fail to see the relevance of the crack-cocaine/t-shirt portion of this post. It smacks of Willie Horton a bit.

The topic of this debate is a Clinton plan versus an Obama plan. One is calling the other a pander. The response is a completely unrelated quote about some random character supporting Obama.

This is exactly the reason why people don't trust Hillary and why people believe she, not Obama, is most responsible for dragging this campaign into the mud. I would have supported her otherwise. I would have been an Edwards/Obama supporter with a fond feeling about the Clintons, but this kind of deflection turns me off. This kind of GOP-style distortion turns me off.

If someone wants to show themselves to be a positive supporter of Hillary Clinton, it does no good to smear Obama with some random crack dealer in a debate over gas tax holidays. Ugly politics.

by mikeplugh 2008-05-04 03:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I guess Wright is proving to have fizzled out... Quick, lets associate Obama with someone else shady!

by Pragmatic Left 2008-05-04 04:15PM | 0 recs
You fail to see the relevance

because there is no relevance. None. Nada. Zilch.

In fact, I would call this sublimal racial sterotyping, if, yes, if, JA wouldnt have threatened everyone accusing anyone with racism, racial insensitivity or racial stereoptyping with getting banned, their user privileges revoked etc.

Again: Citing a story from a British conservative newspaper about drug use of one of Obamas supporters has no discerníble relevance either to the ad described in this post, nor to the gas tax issue. Its also not a currently discussed issue, nor an issue in Indiana or NC between BO and HRC.

So why did Jerome bring it up? Right. Obama did drugs in his youth, so his supporters are just like him. See. Or the more drastic version: You really have to have taken drugs to fall for BOs hope propaganda.

Sick. Disgusting. Rovian.

Jerome. People are laughing about YOU! I would do so too, if it wouldnt make me so sad to see a once respected member of the progressive blogosphere descend into rants, wild spinning and swiftboating of the democratic nominee for president.

I have been on this site since 2003 and had a similar candidate history like you (Clark, Gore, Edwards) but then we diverged. I and my brilliant candidate JRE lost with style. Your are loosing the primary race and with it all your remaining dignity!

You believe you are clever by leaving out the race and ethnicity of the supposed crack smoking drug user now supporting BO? 99% of Americans will imagine that person to be black. People simply do not associate a white guy with smoking crack.

We are supposed to hold back with any criticism of you as being racially insensitive because, well, you are saying so. Because you say, that you arent racist and that we should simply believe you. Well. Actions speak louder than words. And you are making it awfully hard for us to believe you.

Your spin is getting more ridiculous than the official one from the HRC campaign. If you start sounding more desperate and delusioned than Mark Penn in his best days you really ought to look at yourself in the mirror.    

by MarcTGFG 2008-05-04 04:45PM | 0 recs
Re: You fail to see the relevance

I wish I could give you Mojo, however as with a lot of Obama supporters here my Privileges were withdrawn without any warning and polite emails enquiring why ignored.

Censorship is rife on this board.

by telfish 2008-05-04 05:14PM | 0 recs
Re: You fail to see the relevance

MarcTGFG--these are stronger words than I might have used to describe the issue but I do think that you have made a very valid point here. The crack dealer tack on is quite strikingly in the same terrain as many of the things that have been bannable offenses on this site. Jerome's request that we lighten up a little doesn't strike the right chord because so many of his utterancs about Obama are laced with sarcasm and ridicule. It is funny that somebody who supposedly is the elitist candidate also gets the smear by crack cocaine treatment, but a major bummer that that kind of thing happens on the front page here. Kudos for having the balls to say what a lot of people are probably thinking.

by wasder 2008-05-04 05:31PM | 0 recs
Re: You fail to see the relevance

Does anyone else recall the TV interview that featured both Penn and Axelrod? Penn blurted out "cocaine" 3 times. Axelrod called him on it. Just consider that Mark Penn is here & is trying to reinvigorate that theme again.

Mark Penn isn't just one person...

by catilinus 2008-05-04 11:16PM | 0 recs
Jerome, fix teh EV counter

latest poll has Hillary losing to McGrandaddy in WA (SUSA poll).

also, why isn't N.C. not neutral on Obama's side? Your rule to take the last poll from any given state should be followed me thinks. Unless I read your rules wrong, or you changed them...

by alex100 2008-05-04 03:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, fix teh EV counter

and give HIllary W. Virginia while you're at it. She's polling better then McJohnny.

by alex100 2008-05-04 03:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

LAUGHABLE.

Obama's plan has had this tax cut for a long time.  

I suppose ALL of EVERY candidate's platform can be considered pandering, if we really want to label it as such, but this plan of Obama's wasn't created right before a key vote to try to dupe voters.

by freedom78 2008-05-04 03:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Wow -- sometimes I think MyDD stands for My Deep Denial lately.

Doing things that help people in exchange for their votes?  

Democracy.

Doing things you know are either wrong or impossible or vastly overstated in their effects as a last minute desperate Hail Mary to convince voters you're a woman of the common touch and your opponent, who can actually pump his own gas, is an elitist who doesn't feel Blue Collar Pain?  

Priceless.

There is no virtue to winning or losing if you abandon principle.  You need to live with your own conscience no matter who is president.

by realcountrymusic 2008-05-04 03:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

this place isn't the denial "monster" that TL is. This place is quite "moderate" in its overall denial in fact.

by alex100 2008-05-04 03:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

This is, Jerome's efforts notwithstanding, currently the most balanced blog on the lefty side. And that's something considering where it was a month or two ago. It's managed to get MORE balanced whereas Dkos (in the diaries and front page) and TL (in the comments) have sort of become bizarre places, like some futuristic nightmare where half-programmed robots have political passions.

by Addison 2008-05-04 04:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

i think DK has come back to earth. At least they've attacked Obama on various issues.

IMO, OL is the best of the best at this point. They're not perfect but no site will ever be.

by alex100 2008-05-04 05:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I never go to Openleft (just because it's not on my "route"), so that may be true. It's never brought up as an objectionable one.

by Addison 2008-05-04 05:17PM | 0 recs
Fantastic!

"futuristic nightmare where half-programmed robots have political passions"

That's the best turning of phrase I've seen all day.  

by BPK80 2008-05-04 05:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

This is a more balanced site than some but with a fairly towering pro-Clinton bias. Open Left is really the place for discussion of real issues, led by a really amazing and balanced team of front pagers led by the incomparable Chris Bowers.

by wasder 2008-05-04 05:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

bowers is certainly human but I love his analysis. You can tell he puts a lot of time into his posts regardless if they come true or not, there's a lot of thought behind them.

I love Rosenberg when he posts and Stoller is great when frustration doesn't get the best of him. I still view this group the furthest "left" of any blog so it's an easy read for me. I prefer writers who elevate the discussion and all three of those guys do that job really well.

by alex100 2008-05-04 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

amen  Country amen

the saddest part is that this site is a site where people that follow polictics closely
and they know its a political stunt to take advantage of people. I have respect for people that support and admit they know that and still support her. But I worry about the ones that FORCE themselves to believe in her in her out of pure hate for Obama or pure Obsession with Hillary

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 03:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Wow -- sometimes I think MyDD stands for My Deep Denial lately.

BaZING! (And +2)

by CrazyDrumGuy 2008-05-04 06:02PM | 0 recs
Doesn't Shuler have a sense of decency?

As an occasional Redskins fan, doesn't Shuler have any sense of decency? Doesn't Clinton have enough of an uphill climb without Shuler joining her team? Let's hope he doesn't try to pass the ball, but as someone who saw him fail to convert many third down situations without success, she has my sympathies for this endorsement.

by Carnacki 2008-05-04 03:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Doesn't Shuler have a sense of decency?

Excellent point! I think it should be beneath any Democrat to try to smear either candidate by association with the Redskins. That is just plain wrong.

by alvernon 2008-05-04 10:08PM | 0 recs
Politics as usual.

He was for it before he was against it.

Obama's plan, do nothing.

Big oil loves Oilbama.

by gotalife 2008-05-04 03:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Politics as usual.

Hillary's plan is the give-away to the oil companies. Lower taxes and then they'll just raise prices to offset the difference (just like they do whenever this has been tried before). Except now instead of infrastructure projects being funded by that gas tax, all that money goes to the oil companies.

Obama was for this in Illinois until he learned the sad reality of above, and so he's been against it (in IL and everywhere else) ever since.

by Brannon 2008-05-04 03:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Politics as usual.

(a) I'm sure you're not so ignorant as to not understand the gas tax situation, and this is just the usual bluster we get from you

(b) Clinton's plan is to make things worse. So the comparison of plans isn't something you want to concentrate too heavily on.

by Addison 2008-05-04 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Politics as usual.

Great, Obama wants to do nothing so smile when you pay at the pump and say thanks Obama for doing nothing as usual.

by gotalife 2008-05-04 04:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Politics as usual.

Hahahaha, and once again you've managed to say absolutely nothing of substance about the issue.

by Addison 2008-05-04 04:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Politics as usual.

Well, I prefer my leaders to actually try to do something instead of nothing.

Watching our glorious Congress on C Span, the gop want to drill and the Dems want to release the oil reserve and quit buying for it.

Nothing will happen in Congress so I guess Oilbama has joined them in unity to do nothing.

Just spend your rebate checks on gas and stop whining about high gas prices.

by gotalife 2008-05-04 05:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Politics as usual.

You'd prefer your leaders to "actually try to do something", would you? Even if that "trying to doing something" meant diverting revenue needed for infrastructure into more oil company profits?

Presumably you're thrilled at how things have turned out with the buffoon-in-chief and his henchmen "trying to do something" about Al Qaeda, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, the Supreme Court, the constitution, the economy, the environment.

And your logic is so much more compelling for your use of schoolyard name-mangling. Party on!

by Sumo Vita 2008-05-04 06:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

truth hurts? does he really love you back?  I'd settle for him just telling the truth, he's presenting Hillary's tax holiday, the whole point of which is that it's paid for by oil companies, as identical to McCains and he's out there saying that if you take money from lobbyists, that means you work for them. I hope he doesn't work for any of those who helped him financially, Rezco comes to mind. I know he doesn't believe it, or at least I think he doesn't believe everything he says, he's a politician, but it is rather amusing that he's now xeroxing her words on fighting for change, and he's a fighter, but he doesn't pander. He's so above the rest of us? Gimme a break.  

by anna shane 2008-05-04 03:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Hillary is with the Shell Lobbyist not Obama

Steve Elmendorf is a shell Lobbyist that is backing Hillary's Plan  she will make money off this gas tax Holiday when more people fill up

look it up  Hillary is with the Oil lobbyist she is for big Oil  look it up Steve Elmendorf and look up Hillary's fed lobbyist support
I am not asking you to believe me go look up at any credible valid non biased source you like
it won't hurt
Hillary's is betting you won't

Obama is the only candidate that does not take fed lobbyist/special interest money  in this election. so he does not oh anybody any favors except the voters

but Hillary is for big oil just look it up for yourself  Steve Elmendorf  and Hillary and the gas tax holiday  make sure you go to a non biased website  

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 04:36PM | 0 recs
He doesn't take lobbyist money

but their wives are fair game. LMAO.

Obama's Oil Spill
March 31, 2008
Obama says he doesn't take money from oil companies. We say that's a little too slick.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/ obamas_oil_spill.html

by LatinoVoter 2008-05-04 08:13PM | 0 recs
Re: He doesn't take lobbyist money

do you know what a lobbyist is ???

a Ceo of a oil company is not a lobbyist and and their spouses are not lobbysist  you very misleading clinton spin site you linked me too says Former lobbysist donated money so again show me something he is getting money from the LOBBYIST  not the Lobbyist aunt or their hairdresser or the lobbyist's next door neighbor

because you are making youself seem stupid  
by the way look up Hillary's lobbyist connection to shell who is promoting this gas tax Holiday  

care to commnent on that?

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 09:07PM | 0 recs
LMAO

Factcheck is a Clinton spin site? That's a good one.

because you are making youself seem stupid  
by the way look up Hillary's lobbyist connection to shell who is promoting this gas tax Holiday  

care to commnent on that?

It is youRself. Get it right if you're going to call someone stupid. Ok?

Barack voted for the tax holiday in IL three times and even put signs on the pumps informing people on who gave them the tax holiday. Barack voted for the Dick Cheney Energy Bill and gets HUGE money from energy companies and people who work in the oil business. You want to talk about lobbyist ties? Kip Tew, the top advisor to Obama's Indiana campaign is an energy lobbyist.

Chew on that.  

by LatinoVoter 2008-05-04 09:27PM | 0 recs
Re: LMAO

yeah everyone knows he voted for it 3 times einstein but it was only passed once

and he realized it did not work when the gas companies raised prices  thats when  he learned from his experience

oh yeah and Clinton voted in AGAINST THIS IN 2000

so I rest my case

and the bush cheney energy has incentive for investing in alternetive energy which is what we need to reduce our dependency on foreign oil but I guess you are against that right ?   stay off the clinton spin sites ...its making you dizzy  

by wellinformed 2008-05-05 04:55AM | 0 recs
Don't rest your case so quick

Hillary opposed it in 2000 because it was financed with transportation funds.

So it took Obama three vote to realize he was WRONG? What happened to being "right on day one?"

by LatinoVoter 2008-05-05 10:40AM | 0 recs
Jerome, WTF?

Have you finally become so delusional in your single minded quest to glorify Hillary and demonize Obama that you have lost all pretense of perspective and analysis? You know, you used to be smarter than this. If Obama pulls up from behind and makes Indiana close or wins it outright, it will be because of this ad. This ad makes a very effective argument. It makes the case that Hillary's "tax cut" is convenient pandering while simultaneously reminding voters that Obama is for reasonable tax relief for the middle class. How is this in any way funny or hypocritical? Oh that's right, it's because it's an Obama ad and not a Hillary ad. I almost forgot...(eye roll).

by Mr Grohl 2008-05-04 03:36PM | 0 recs
I really did start laughing out loud

I'm afraid these days, most people are only laughing at a once respected liberal who now carries water for the DLC and John McCain.

by Kobi 2008-05-04 03:40PM | 0 recs
Cheap shots

I think you mean ad, not add.

Obama has long promised lower taxes for the middle class, so talking about a $1,000 taxcut is in line with that. It's also not economically irresponsible, given Obama has promised to make the rich pay their fare share.

Posting an article from a Tory newspaper that says a recovering crack dealer and felon is "typical" of those inspired by Obama is pretty tawdry.

by AdrianLesher 2008-05-04 03:41PM | 0 recs
Stay classy, Jerome...
Not all tax cuts are pandering, so could you add some substance to your claim?
by clad 2008-05-04 03:44PM | 0 recs
How to win or why he/she should?

Most of your campaign coverage is about why Hillary is electable and Obama isn't. This post's criticism comes perilously close to saying that Obama shouldn't win, because he panders.

If you're saying that Obama's alleged hypocrisy in this ad is obvious to voters, and will hurt him in terms of electability, then that's one thing. (I think you'd be wrong, but it's still a valid argument.)

But if your criticism is one about why he shouldn't win (because he panders), then I think you've changed course from your usual MO. I can see supporting Clinton for the sole purpose of the need to get a Dem in the White House, but once you argue that she Obama is a bad person because he panders, you open Hillary to many many criticisms (the war springs to mind, of course).

by Jonmac 2008-05-04 03:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

I don't think Obama ever said he was against tax cuts as a way to ease the economic situation of Americans during this period. He's against the gas tax getting cut for very good, very well known reasons. You're just obfuscating for effect.

by Addison 2008-05-04 04:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Guys...I get the idea Jerome might not like Obama so much. I don't know why, just this...vague feeling I'm getting.

by jaiwithani 2008-05-04 04:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

"James Pickens is typical of those who have been inspired by the black senator from Illinois. A reformed crack cocaine dealer, he is now peddling Obama T-shirts."

I don't know about that but haven't you heard about the dead guy who came alive because Obama wept for him?

Personally I do not believe any of these gimmicks. He has policies that fall far short of any measurable standards, so we have bs anecdotes galore.

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 04:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

And in this thread we can see that his opponents have nothing substantive to say against his gas tax policies (that is what this thread is supposedly about, after all), and so they just have BS make-believe anti-Obama stuff galore.

Your comment also proves that it's only anti-Obama people who make him out to be the second coming of Jesus, just so they can rip him down again for political effect.

by Addison 2008-05-04 04:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

which I think is weird because any body that betrays HRC is called a Judas ?? and we think our candidate is a messiah ?? you HRC supporters confuse me

by wellinformed 2008-05-04 04:42PM | 0 recs
Judas

In fairness to HRC supporters, it wasn't a normal person who called Bill Richardson a Judas. It was James Carville.

This is the guy who recently suggested that Hillary is a transgendered mutant by saying she is a woman with three testicles.

by alvernon 2008-05-04 10:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

what gas tax "policy" are you taking about? the man is bereft of policies. I do not know how he can go against a policy that gives temporary relief to middle class while raising taxes on the windfall profits of oil companies. But then again that's too much to ask of someone who likes the Republican idea of industry deregulation for profit margins including allowing industry to set up pollution standards and monitoring them.

And oh did I forget to mention his vote for the best bill for oil companies that money can buy? or for that matter the money he is raking in from the oil execs? Well given his conflicting interests I do not see him taxing the oil company profits ever, he will never bite the hand that feeds him. So policy and principle are just buzzwords. Heart of it he is a politician looking after his interests, and why shouldn't he when his devoted followers will pardon all his transgressions.

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 05:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

Read Obama's energy plan http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/En ergyFactSheet.pdf

by politicsmatters 2008-05-04 05:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

I read that sometime ago. It is high on fluff and low on specifics when you compare to this:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/files/pdf/ poweringamericasfuture.pdf

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 07:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

First, you're full of shit if you say Obama's plan is fluff.  Both of those documents contain double-digit pages explaining very specific policy proposals.  In fact the real difference (aside from substantive policy points) is that Obama provides a historical context and offers arguments on why his plan is better than others while Hillary offers bullet points and some text to explain the benefits of her plan.  On issues of substance, the policies are very close.  They both call for a cap & trade system; both calling for higher fuel mileage; they both argue for a $150 billion dollar investment in alternative energy.  Where they differ is mostly on how much and by when.  For example, Hillary wants to require 55 mpg by 2030 whereas Obama calls for 40 mpg by 2016.

So if you expect me to honestly believe that your "objective" assessment is that Obama's plan is unspecific and unimpressive from a policy pov than you think I'm stupid.  And I don't appreciate that.  If we were going to go by who had the best energy plan, then we should have voted for Richardson.  His energy plan was the most forward-thinking of anyone's.  I bet you, it's b/c he's a westerner.

Second, you Clinton folks like to talk about how Obama copied his plans from Clinton.  Guess who came out with their plans first?  That's right, Obama.  Clinton's plan came out in November a full month after Obama came out with his plan.

So crawl back under your bridge troll.  B/c you offer us no substance.  Only slander and invective.  Crawl back home and leave us good people without your wingnuttery.

by nklein 2008-05-05 05:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

Your breathless flurry of accusations might be weightier if accompanied by reliable references supporting your claims, instead of the circular reasoning free-for-all in evidence here.

by Sumo Vita 2008-05-04 06:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

I'm sorry living in ignorance of the many different policy positions of your messiah does not obligate me in anyway to show you the light. If you are interested in fact-checking any of my assertions there is a tool called Google which I think everyone should learn to use. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong in my facts, but I doubt it because as you have showed, bloviation is a very easy way of deflecting the issues at hand.

by tarheel74 2008-05-04 07:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome, "Is this true?"

You always accuse others of ignorantly adopting Obama without having studied his policies.  Which policies attracted you to Clinton?  I don't mean which policy issues area, such as health-care.  I mean which policies.  Is it mandates?  Or gas tax? Or her windfall profits tax that is now allocated to two different programs?  While accusing others of ignorance, you don't show your knowledge.  And thus you sound hypocritical and already like an asshole.

by nklein 2008-05-05 05:23AM | 0 recs
Who's bloviating now?

How nice for you that you're an expert at search engines.

I did not, of course, see you as a reliable source of my information. I was, of course, pointing out the insubstantial nature of your assertions and the uncompelling nature of conclusions based on these. Since you asked nicely, I'll be more explicit:

"the man is bereft of policies".
- fantasy claim proven repeatedly on this site to be false.

"I do not know how he can go against a policy that gives temporary relief to middle class"
- fantasy claim proven repeatedly on this site to be false.

"while raising taxes on the windfall profits of oil companies."
- shown on this site to be a red herring

"But then again that's too much to ask of someone who likes the Republican idea of industry deregulation for profit margins "
- pointless rhetoric

"And oh did I forget to mention his vote for the best bill for oil companies that money can buy?"
- deliberate misrepresentation

"or for that matter the money he is raking in from the oil execs"
- more unsubstantiated assertions

"given his conflicting interests I do not see him taxing the oil company profits ever, he will never bite the hand that feeds him."
- loose deduction based on earlier fantasies and misrepresentation. ergo, circular reasoning.

I did plan on providing you with links to articles posted on this site that contradict your claims as stated above. However given I'm short of time, and given your obvious familiarity with online searches, I'll leave that as an exercise to you instead. Have a nice day.

by Sumo Vita 2008-05-05 11:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Why are all Obama's ads so bad? He sounds like he's constantly regurgitating the Allstate Ads on TV.

Anyway, why is he wasting time on this kind of stuff and not replying to the GOP ads that are attacking him with Wright?

by Ga6thDem 2008-05-04 04:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

James Pickens is typical of those who have been inspired by the black senator from Illinois. A reformed crack cocaine dealer, he is now peddling Obama T-shirts. Mr Pickens, 50, has served three prison terms totalling 13 years, but vowed to change his ways after hearing Mr Obama speak. He said: "I never voted for a president before. He's for change, which is something I need in my life. Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling T-shirts."

Pathetic, Jerome. Utterly, totally pathetic.

by tysonpublic 2008-05-04 04:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

This insert is Bush league, especially considering this has nothing to do with the rest of the post.

Crack dealers for Obama?

This seemed to have backfired for the Clinton campaign in South Carolina when Clinton surrogate Bob Johnson insinuated Obama was a drug dealer in his youth. Obama has gotten 85-90 percent of the black vote ever since.

Jerome, hit diaries can be fun, but cribbing from a foreign Conservative publication isn't going to win you points with anyone.    

by wengler 2008-05-04 05:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Mark Penn and Lester Maddox would love it. They would say it was entirely relevant to a post about a gas tax holiday.

by catilinus 2008-05-04 11:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

My current favorite pander is HRC's mailer trying to appeal to gun owners, which has a picture which doesn't show an American gun, but a very expensive German one that -- uh -- has been photographically modified to depict one that doesn't in fact exist?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0 508/Clinton_mailings_gun_gaffe.html

It's not very effective pandering when people catch on that you're doing it:

In this poll, Clinton is the candidate most viewed as pandering: Just 34 percent think she says what she believes, while nearly two in three believe she says what people want to hear. For both Obama and McCain, just over half say they say what he believes and four in 10 think they say what voters want to hear.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/0 4/opinion/polls/main4069259_page2.shtml

by politicsmatters 2008-05-04 05:22PM | 0 recs
Wow.

This diary is really bad...with no real point, a bizzare quote without any direct (or even indirect, really) connection and arguably suspect.

This guy owns MyDD?
You gotta be f*@king kidding me.

By the way. Anyone here know anything about windfall profits and multi-national corporations? Do you all really think that the oil companies are going to get 'screwed' while the little people get their pizza money?

Ask HRC how she felt about gas taxes when she ran against Lazio, Jerome.

by Newcomer 2008-05-04 05:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Another Obama hit job?  Yikes.

by Bobby Obama 2008-05-04 06:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Recently, OBAMA ducks debates, says nothing new, virtually does nothing but denouncing Rev. Wright.
There is nothing positive coming out from him.

He says that he advocates freeze on foreclosures. don't believe him. He voted 'No'. Here is the fact from politifact.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/
Clinton and Obama differ on freeze on foreclosures in housing. Hillary Clinton advocates "a freeze on foreclosures. Barack Obama said no."
She's right about Obama's position.

Now the party sent out Joe Andrew to do the dirty work for him to fix the election for him, to push HIllary out of election for him so that voters have no more say in the primary nomination.

Just days before the Pennsylvania, Newsweek reported that he is pulling away from Hillary but in fact he lost in landslide.

Now he takes off his jacket for the first time in his campaign and put on new working class new look telling voters everything Hillary does is wrong while he is sitting out.

let's voices be heard and votes be counted in an American way. The people makes the decision, whatever it is but not the media, the party, and the fanatics.

by John Lai 2008-05-04 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

My goodness, what a dreary thread this is.

It's the same old story, just with different names, insults, and topics. Well, the profanity is the same.

by OrangeFur 2008-05-04 08:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama didn't pander, before he did

Well, the profanity is the same.

I know, right? We need to get some creative new profanity on these boards! I, for one, would not mind being called a "goat rapist" just so we can liven up the atmosphere a bit.

Don't be lazy and call me a "goat fucker." That's the same old politics as usual.

by alvernon 2008-05-04 10:18PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads