Preacher Barack Obama

Talking smack:

"I take the Clinton campaign's word that they didn't know what this guy was doing and I understand all that," Obama said, "but the one thing I will say is I told my staff that if I catch you guys doing any kind of stuff like this you're fired. Period."

"And I think what we need to do -- and I told this to senator Clinton yesterday -- is that we need to send a strong message to all of our surrogates and all of our staffs, that we don't play that," he said. "I know my staff has gotten that message because it's one that I delivered several months ago and I haven't seen that come out of their mouths."


Yes, that's why Barack Obama fired those staffers of his that came up with the racial slur Punjab-D to describe Clinton; and that's why Obama's fired the staffer that sidled up to Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic, to ask "when reporters would begin to look into Bill Clinton's post presidential sex life."  That's probably Robert Gibbs, one of the sleaziest of the sleazy, that works as Obama's Communications Director.

Right.  

This drug stuff was a timid issue that the Obama campaign over reacted too, making it a bigger story than it needed to be. And now Obama is starting to sound petty and thin-skinned. What's Obama gonna do in the general election when he confronts a real propoganda takedown machine? Is he gonna lecture them while they rip him to pieces?

Update [2007-12-14 22:4:38 by Jerome Armstrong]: This whole drug thing is annoying and stupid. Shaheen was a jerk for making that statement. I wish the Obama campaign would have just ignored it. I tried to not blog at all about it, then nearly did so because of that stupid Hardball episode this am, and managed to avoid it, but then came across this ridiculous spin by Obama-- long past when it should have been dead.

That said, I do think there might be something there about this having traction among the black community moving toward Obama-- and that might be why they are milking it politically. But if so, it's a short-term gain when compared with the longterm result of Republicans having an easier time re-opening the issue-- with a much harsher attack.



Display:


Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 1)

Democrat Taylor Marsh offers an interesting analysis of Obama's history with cocaine.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:21:35 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 1)

I like Taylor but that is a TERRIBLE post. I can't find much I agree with in it and alot I find borderline offensive.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:31:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

She makes a few good points.  I discuss Obama's use of the Christian conversion in the comments section.  Funny how he and the GOP always use confession as a way of shirking accountability.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:35:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

this article provides an african-american perspective on the corporate strategy of oprah and obama.

article


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:39:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Punjab Slur (none / 0)

I am Punjabi, and Punjab-D is not a slur! If you dont understand something, dont try to talk knowledgably about it.


by AC4508 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:48:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Gosh Jerome. You are the best! Love it!  

Now I'm waiting for the Barry supporters to swarm the your post.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:21:40 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Or the Hillbots to swarm around anyone attacking Obama... Oh, looks like you are here!!!


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:29:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Don't he a sour pus yitbos. KOS would be an excellent place for you, considering all the Barry operatives. They hate anyone and anything for HRC. Take it from me, I just got banned over there, LOL!


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:33:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You weren't banned for being a Clinton supporter, (2.00 / 1)

you were banned for personally threatening another user.


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:36:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You weren't banned for being a Clinton support (none / 0)

Exactly. That was some creepy shit lonette was doing over there.


by casperr on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:41:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You weren't banned for being a Clinton support (none / 0)

Oh come on. It was icebergslim for goodness sake. She egged me on. Ice is a paid Obama worker.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:46:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You weren't banned for being a Clinton support (none / 0)

THAT is total bullshit and you know it.

Threatening to out another blogger (which you did multiple times) is a bannable offense at DailyKos. End of story.


by casperr on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:05:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You weren't banned for being a Clinton support (none / 0)

I accept the banning casperr.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:49:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You weren't banned for (none / 0)

do you have a link?  i do not trust you.  after all, you are an obama operative, and i have seen what you and others have done online to supporters of clinton and obama.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:42:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The comment, of course, is no more, (none / 0)

since she was banned.  But it was an admin, hunter, who did the banning.  


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:45:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The comment, of course, is no more, (none / 0)

i do not buy it.  you do not have a link.  now you can create stories.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:50:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Heh (none / 0)

Hey, I was banned at daily kos, it happens. If she did threaten to out someone's personal identity, then of course she was banned. As I understand it, icebergslim is banned here. For the record, I am not a big fan of icebergslim, who wrote what I thought was a bigoted post about Latinos who raised money for Clinton.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:53:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

BTD,

I have seen how the Obama people operate there, and the force people to defend themselves, only to troll rate every single comment.  they do it all the time, and it is disgusting.  she called someone an operative, and they decided that banning was condign punishment for that offense.  

lonette33, i would not worry.  everyone understands what happened, and no one thinks less of you for it.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:56:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

That's rich coming from you.  You've used the same tactics on MyDD under your many many different signons.


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:58:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No question (none / 0)

My banning/leaving (long story) came as a result of an Obama fight (I'm actually pretty friendly with him now - Geekesque). I really detest the Obama hordes at daily kos. Frankly, I think the Obama folks here are pretty darn good, most of them. Truth be told, best thing to ever happen to me. I get to focus on issues at Talk Left and then talk politics here in a less toxic pool when the mood strikes me. I've said this before - I remain good friends with Markos and am friendly with Jerome. Think well of them both. Disagree a fair amount with them of course. More fun that way.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:03:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I never heard the story of your banning (none / 0)

I wasn't following it closely, and suddenly you were banned, and I had no clue why.

Geekesque picks a lot of fights. I try not to mix it up with Obama supporters at Daily Kos. There have been too many flamewars between the Edwards and Obama supporters there.


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:23:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I never heard the story of your banning (none / 0)

How do you guys find time to blog on Dailykos as well?  I posted there for a couple of months, but that place was not to my liking, so I decided on here.  I read there sometimes, and also vote when a poll interests me, but I would not have the time to do both discussion-wise.  I see some people blogging all over the place, on 4, 5 different blogs, all the time.  A lot to keep track of, to be sure.


by georgep on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:08:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

It wasn't a direct threat BTD. I said, "I could have outed you a long time ago, seeing as I work for the government, it's at the tip of my fingers".  It wasn't a full threat. But I knew I was gone after the comment, so I didn't care.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:07:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

Well you knew you would be banned for it. It's a strict rule.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:16:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

True! I actually found out from one of the other users. I knew at that point I was going to get banned. I just loathe icebergslim so much. Calling me a Clinton troll. Troll rating comments that didn't deserve it. Advising her cohorts to troll rate me. Going after MyDD and Jerome. I was bound to crack. She brings out the worst in me. I except the banning. Stuff happens.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:22:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

You were banned? Wow, things have really gotten bad then. I've pretty much stayed away until the last week or so but have had numerous attacks made on me. I think my low uid might keep me from getting troll rated.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:29:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

Well, I announced I was leaving and Markos and I exchanged some words and so on. We made up since then. We're still good friends. I imagione if I asked to come back, he'd let me. But truth to be told, I am not interested in participating there now. Though I do enjoy the FPers for the most part.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:32:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

Are there too many sockpuppets over there for you to deal with right now?

The Obama supporters are the new deaniacs-you can't criticize Obama, you can't discuss any failing he might have or whatever. But of course, it's okay to diss Hillary. Or Edwards sometimes.

I'm undecided and they have ticked me off with their sactimonious so much that it makes me WANT to be a Hillary supporter.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:03:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

I don't know from sock puppets. I just find it mindnumbingly boring and stupid. I imagine people thought the same thing in 2003-04.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:08:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

Yep, it's a repeat of the Dem primaries 4 years ago. And it is tiresome.

Can we have some debate please instead of the constant invective hurling?


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:22:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Heh (none / 0)

Icebergslim was teetering on the brink of the acceptable here for weeks as for personal insults, but she was finally banned when she called Jerome a "tool" (as in "Jerome is a tool") for putting up a diary pretty much like this one.  She returned as "iamready" and at least 2 more sockpuppets.  


by georgep on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:10:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The comment, of course, is no more, (none / 0)

Lonette doesn't seem to deny it.  


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:57:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The comment, of course, is no more, (none / 0)

I explained what happened. See comment above. Besides it was icebergslim for goodness sake. I mean come on.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:59:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Doesn't matter who it is (none / 0)

You don't threaten people.


by casperr on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:05:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's over. (none / 0)

casperr, it's over and done with. You are making much too much of it. Ice knew what she was doing.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:08:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I checked the hidden comments at DKos (2.00 / 1)

It was there. It was a threat to use other means to find information on icebergslim. Unwise and certainly a bannable offense.


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:20:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I checked the hidden comments at DKos (none / 0)

But that is not a threat, unless, of course, icebergslim has something to hide.

I was there too.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:22:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you are wrong (none / 0)

I have "nothing to hide," and in fact, some people in Iowa know who I am.

But I prefer to blog as desmoinesdem rather than under my name.

If anyone ever threatened to out me, I would report it to the Daily Kos administrators immediately. That kind of threat warrants banning.


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:25:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

More to the story! (none / 0)

desmoniniedem, I accept the banning. However, there's more to the story. It is well known that she works for the Obama campaign. You need to read all my comments and her comments. She clearly was trying to get me going. She knew what she what she was doing.  I shouldn't have said it. I bite it and got banned. I accept it. There's a long history between myself and ice. But I understand where you are coming from.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:34:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More to the story! (none / 0)

I know how icebergslim and the user for whom icebergslim serves as a sockpuppet operate.  she has a history of engaging and then banning users she and her cadre dislike.  

i would not worry, as she is irrelevant.  and she does work for the obama campaign.  in fact, she attended camp obama.  

lonnette, did you know hillary is 44?  


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:37:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More to the story! (none / 0)

Yes hillary is 44!  Love it!


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:39:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I checked the hidden comments at DKos (none / 0)

I accept the banning. But ice egged me on. She brings out the worst in me.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:24:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I checked the hidden comments at DKos (none / 0)

icebergslim is a sockpuppet for another user there who is also a woman and an obama supporter.  i will not mention names, but i know who icebergslim is.  

i am not surprised.  that user has a history of banning people who stand up to her.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:28:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I checked the hidden comments at DKos (none / 0)

Iceberg slim is too much. Can't be reasonable with that one.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:31:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I checked the hidden comments at DKos (none / 0)

No, and one cannot reason with user for whom icebergslim is a sockpuppet.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:33:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I checked the hidden comments at DKos (none / 0)

I bit it. But she egged me on. I accept the banning.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:37:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Your signature... (none / 0)

I'm sure you've been asked about it before.

Aside from that one article your signature links to -- which says nothing -- do you have a single shred of evidence that Obama did anything unethical in any interaction with Tony Rezko?

Otherwise, you should remove it.

And don't write what you think is true. Show me links to evidence. Not about how bad Rezko is, either. Something that specifically ties Obama to something worth talking about.


What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:57:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your signature... (none / 0)

The article to which I link augments research already conducted by the Chicago Sun-Times.  And to be frank, I think it is mighty disingenuous of you to claim the article states nothing, for it states a lot.  Indeed, how else does one explains Obama's decision to allow a the son of a Rezko associate to serve as an Intern in DC?  

Obama on the land deal with Rezko

The article discusses Obama's ties with Rezko since the 1990s.  

This article offers more details on the joint purchase of land and a house

This article discusses his ties to Rezko since the late 1980s.  It also discusses how neither Obama nor the law firm at which he worked would disclose documents to the Sun-Times.

Obama's ex-boss is a Rezko partner

here are some quotes from an editorial in April I read in the Sun-Times that are particularly damaging:

"Kudos to the Chicago aldermen who are asking some of the same questions we had in response to a Sun-Times investigation published earlier this week: Why did the city and state continue to provide loans, grants and tax credits to projects that involved Tony Rezko when the city at the same time was suing his company in Housing Court for basics such as no heat? Why didn't the city shut off the spigot as soon as his buildings ran into problems? Didn't one city department know what another department was doing?"

"The investigation by reporter Tim Novak found that Rezko's development company, Rezmar Corp., got more than $100 million in government and private loans between 1989 and 1998 to renovate 30 apartment buildings for poor people. The projects quickly ran into trouble, and Rezmar was sued repeatedly by the city. Yet the city continued making deal after deal with Rezmar, which was paid nearly $7 million in development fees on the projects."

"Another is presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama, who received more than $50,000 from the same sources between 1998 and 2004. Obama already has been forced to answer questions about a real estate deal between him and Rezko, a longtime friend, contributor and fund-raiser. In addition to that connection, Novak reported this week that Obama did previously undisclosed legal work for some of Rezko's housing development projects. He insists it was only five hours of work and that he was unaware of problems at the projects, even though 11 of them were in the state Senate district he used to represent. There's nothing illegal about the work, but his efforts to dodge Novak's questions about it make it appear as if he has something to hide."

And there are stories in the sidebars of the Sun-Times's articles.

Anyone can perform a Google search, and one realizes that obama has a long history with Rezko, who received state funds while Obama was in the Senate for his various properties.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:21:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I believe the question was... (none / 0)

for you to produce "...a single shred of evidence that Obama did anything unethical in any interaction with Tony Rezko."

Though admirably lengthy, your comment did not provide any evidence.


What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:37:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I believe the question was... (none / 0)

I guess you did not want evidence.  It is all covered in the Sun-Times over a seven month period.  Visit the library, do some research, and you will see that Obama and Rezko have been very close friends for a very long time.  


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:41:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tiring... (none / 0)

The
question
was...

...a
single
shred
of
evidence
that
Obama
did
anything
unethical
in
any
interaction
with
Tony
Rezko?

Your
answer
is
clearly
no.


What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:47:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tiring... (none / 0)

my answer is yes.  i cite the intern, the donations, the property deal, the relation a boss had with rezko, the subsidies rezko received from the illinois state legislature.  the articles i cite discuss a relationship that extends over two decades.

it is all unethical, and it reveals that obama is tied to a corrupt political machine.

you choose to ignore this.

obama is corrupt.  obama is rezko.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:55:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ok (none / 0)

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/35382 9,CST-NWS-rez23.article

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/35379 7,CST-NWS-rezdavis23.http://www.mydd.com /comments/2007/12/14/211213/33/149/post# here
MyDD :: Comments Preacher Barack Obamaarticle

Ethical questions surround Obama's  shady real estate deal and relationship with indicted political fundraiser and Arab-American activist  Tony Rezko, who befriended Obama during his Harvard days.

Obama bought a $1,650,000 Georgian revival mansion at a gigantic discounted price, some $300,000 less than the asking price.  The same day, Rezko's wife bought the adjoining lot, paying the full $625,000 asking price.

The Rezko lot wasn't accessible from the public street.  However, it abuts Obama's property and  provided a private preserve that adds to its ambience.  Obama  bought the a secton of the Rezko property for $104,500 -- $520,500 less than Rezko's wife paid for it.

Did Tony Rezko and his wife subsidize the purchase of Obama's opulent home?

Mr. Obama turned to Mr. Rezko for help at several important junctures. Records show that when Mr. Obama needed cash in the waning days of his losing 2000 Congressional campaign, Mr. Rezko rounded up thousands of dollars from business contacts. In 2003, Mr. Rezko helped Mr. Obama expand his fund-raising for the Senate primary by being host of a dinner at his Mediterranean-style home for 150 people, including some whose names have since come up in the influence scandal.

At any rate, this is pretty good for a guy earning $165,200 per and who once ran his credit cards up so high that the credit card company denied him access to further use of his card.

[----------

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/14/us/pol itics/14rezko.html?ex=1182484800&en= 354deb68b6c69cfe&ei=5099&partner =TOPIXNEWS

And when Mr. Obama and his wife, Michelle, bought a house in 2005, Mr. Rezko stepped in again. Even though his finances were deteriorating, Mr. Rezko arranged for his wife to buy an adjacent lot, and she later sold the Obamas a 10-foot-wide strip of land that expanded their yard.

The land sale occurred after it had been reported that Mr. Rezko was under federal investigation. That awkward fact prompted Mr. Obama, who has cast himself as largely free from the normal influences of politics, to express regret over what he called his own bad judgment.

"Senator Obama is a very intelligent man, and everyone by then was very familiar with who Tony Rezko was," said Cindi Canary, executive director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, a nonpartisan research group. "So it was a little stunning that so late in the game Senator Obama would still have such close involvement with Rezko."

While it is not clear what Mr. Rezko got from the relationship, he liked to display his alliances with politicians, including Mr. Obama.

In one instance, when he was running for the Senate, Mr. Obama stopped by to shake hands while Mr. Rezko, an immigrant from Syria, was entertaining Middle Eastern bankers considering an investment in one of his projects.

[Years earlier, as a state legislator, Mr. Obama wrote letters to city and state officials supporting efforts by Mr. Rezko and a partner to build apartments for the elderly with $14 million in government money, The Chicago Sun-Times reported in its June 13 editions.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:00:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your signature... (none / 0)

isnt my job to keep you informed

id spend an hour and youd just blow it off

sorry, no.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 06:07:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you... (none / 0)

To you and truthteller for proving the emptyness of your charges.

You do know that nobody takes any of that seriously, right?


What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 10:46:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The comment, of course, is no more, (none / 0)

One thing about getting banned at dailykos -- your comments live forever. They don't delete them. Probably not worth your time, though.


by dblhelix on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:49:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You weren't banned for (none / 0)

Truth, it was icebergslim. She came into the diary calling me a troll and troll rating me. Then she went after MyDD and Jerome.  I told her she was banned for sliming Jerome. She kept on egging me. She and another one of her cohorts kept troll rating me. Then a swarm of Clinton supporters started to rec the diary.  FYI: it was world dictators diary from the other day. When she saw that did work, she kept egging me on. I told her I could have outed her along time ago. She kept egging me on. She knew what she was doing. Hey I figured I was going to be banned anyway, so I didn't hold back any longer. She said, are you threatening me. Then I got banned.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:51:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You weren't banned for (none / 0)

that is a typical obama strategy at kos.  that is why many supporters of other candidates no longer write there, as obama supporters gang up on supporters of other candidates.  and there is one admin there who is aligned with elise and icebergslim.  i saw what happened, and it was ugly.  you are not the only one.  and besides, icebergslim was banned from this site, as was jeremiahthemessiah.  the obama people online have a terrible record with the blogs.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:54:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Please be honest! (none / 0)

Oh please. I threatened to out an Obama paid worker. Please tell the truth. Don't lie.


by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:44:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 1)

It isn't the comment, its the offensive use of the word Barry.  I actually don't liek the word Hillbots, but since you don't seem to care just how disrespectful you are being, I'll use it when talking about you.  Show some respect.. what if I started calling Hillary, a Cow or something like that?  Same level of disrespect.  Just say Barack or Obama... using Barry liek you are some close friend of his is a spit in the face of him, his supporters and very GOP-esque.


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:56:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

yitbos, I'm not going to stop calling him Barry. It's not an offense name at all.


by lonnette33 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 07:25:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I try to avoid dKos. It's just comment overload. Also, too much orange.


While I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work ~ Barack Obama
by bowiegeek on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 02:01:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Thank's bowiegeek. LOL. Orange, organe and more organe. LOL! I fell right into ice's trap. She know what she was doing. She's quite clever. It's my fault utlimately and I got banned.


by lonnette33 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 07:22:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 3)

Does this explain why supporters and superdelegates for Obama are now resurrecting Monica?  And does this explain why Michelle Obama mentioned Hillary's inability to run a household while campaigning in SC?  Or is only Obama allowed to make direct and vague references to all the salacious gossip surrounding the Clintons?

He is a hypocrite.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:24:40 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

If Michelle Obama is making those kinds of comments then she'll royally tick off women voters. I can't believe how Liebermanish they are becoming.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:34:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

"If" is an important word you just used. No evidence was given for this stuff.


Visit DebateScoop
by demondeac on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:52:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I'm always skeptical of what comes out of any supporter of a candidate's mouth until it's been proven.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:10:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

John Dickerson had a good headline this week (2.00 / 1)

"Hillary Clinton Was Supposed to Know How to Rumble"

That was her whole argument, that she could play hardball politics, that she could go toe to toe with the toughest the right had to offer...

And instead she's been flailing all week and sinking fast.  The minute she went on the offensive, she fell apart.  Her campaign has been tripping over itself all week.


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:28:02 PM EST

that is the truth (none / 0)

Also, this would work better for her if her surrogates hadn't spent the whole month of November whining about other candidates "attacking" her.


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:27:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ezra Klein laid it all out today (none / 0)

and made this point really well:
By the November's end, Obama was routinely leading in the polls.  The Clinton campaign, noticing this, did exactly what you're supposed to do when you're a couple points behind: They tried to knock the other guy down. And ended up on the floor themselves. Obama, it turned out, had spent so much time inveighing against political attacks, and the Clinton campaign had invested so much energy in popularizing that sentiment, that their every assault now began to backfire.

One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:58:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ezra Klein laid it all out today (none / 0)

I'll believe this when I see some polls that confirm it.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:06:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Plenty of those (none / 0)

here.


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 05:47:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Plenty of those (none / 0)

I'm talking about polls next week after the whole deal has settled into people's minds.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:12:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 4)

Ah another day, another Obama attack by Jerome Armstrong.


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:28:08 PM EST

Like Jerome feels about Obama... (none / 0)

...I felt about Warner.

He just has a bigger platform than these comments.


by MNPundit on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:08:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Meh (2.00 / 1)

I think Obama milked the story and the Clinton campaing has to take its lumps. Shrewdly, they made Shaheen resign. Plus I love this phrase from Obama - "we don't play that" - reminds me of my youth. Of course they play that. They are all pols.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:28:15 PM EST

Re: Meh (none / 0)

What do you think of Democrat Taylor Marsh's definitive account of Obama's use and abuse of his past with cocaine and other illegal substances?


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:31:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

Just responded to you. Hated it frankly. And I like Taylor.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:32:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (2.00 / 1)

I think Taylor has had some good posts on Obama, but I'm unimpressed with her cocaine stuff as well.

I do think Obama's campaign was behind the Denver Post stuff.  One of the reasons why I don't think the Clinton campaign planned Sheehan's remarks is that it was Sheehan.  I'm sure they were pushing the drug story (no pun intended), but I don't think they wanted it done that way.  

I'm waiting for the uproar over the Denver Post stuff and the calls for Obama to distance himself from it.  My guess is I'll be waiting a long time.


by BDB on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:56:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

I think pushing the cocaine story IN ANY WAY was pretty stupid. But leaving fingerprints was just plain idiotic.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:59:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

It is suspicious. But I do not buy it as coming from Obama for simple reason - it is a stupid line of attack and splatters Obama. I think, unfortunately, there is a better argument for thinking the Shaeheen thing was planned from inside. I think both arguments weak though. I do not think either was. Then again, maybe both campaigns are just that stupid. Frankil,y at this point I am beginning to think they are all incompetents.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:12:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

This primary campaign is remarkable only for its vapidity.  But I do believe the Denver article is planned: notice Michelle mentioned Hillary's inability to run a household in SC; notice the regional argument many Obama supporters make online about Hillary and Udall; notice that the Obama campaign utilizes the phrase "glass houses" in press releases; notice the timing.

It was planned, and Obama should apologize in person to Hillary, Bill, Chelsea and Dorothy Rodham on national television.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:15:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

pleeeze (none / 0)

Let me clue you in...
John Millin: chairman of the Wyoming Democratic Party

He has not offical connect to the campaign.

Save you insults for when you know what your talking about.


by JoeCoaster on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:36:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: pleeeze (none / 0)

state chair for obama.  

planned article.  disgusting.  typical.  obama is a hypocrite.

hillary is 44.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:38:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

i have a link (none / 0)

how about you? liar..

Nevada Supporters - Review Journal


by JoeCoaster on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 06:56:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

Pretty much trumped up BS... but I expect that from Marsh.  


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:33:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

From what i'm hearing in the black community there is a movement now never to support Hillary, they feel stabbed in the back. sha had better close it out in Iowa and NH becuase once this campaign goes nation wide Obama's going to win atleast 80% of the 25% of black dem primary votes.  No one on black radio buys her story, no one.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:31:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

Well, seriously doubt what you are hearing personally. But who knows?
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:32:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

I am hearing it and so is Ben Smith.

got two interesting emails two minutes with some racial charge currently running through the campaign: Shaheen's suggestion Obama was a drug dealer and Obama's absolution of Biden.

Kelsey Morgan, a sales rep in Philadelphia, e-mails:

As someone who basically works from their car, I listen to a lot (OK, way too much) black radio. I can tell you the palpable sense of betrayal and the absolute feeling that African-Americans have been stabbed in the back by someone they thought was their friend has been overwhelming over the airwaves the past 36 hours. Over and over again, I've heard caller after caller they say they'll never vote for Hillary even if she's the nominee.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:36:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

The Ben Smith articles is based on one email.  That is not an index of an entire community's sentiment.  Get real.  


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:38:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (2.00 / 1)

No offense to Kelsey Morgan, but that is ridiculous. If Rangel and Lewis and people like that juped ship maybe you would have something, but Kelsey Morgan does not inspire me to believe the story. Frankly, I think it is inordinately silly.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:39:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's Followers (2.00 / 1)

I suspect this is something being pushed by Obama's supporters inside and outside the black community.  Both Clintons have excellent civil rights records and black voters know that.  They may go for Obama, but I don't think a negative campaign against Clinton or inferring she is somehow racist will work.  It may, in fact, backfire.


by BDB on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:59:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

Don't buy it BTD! Although, Barry chose the Tom Joyner show to make the comments Jerome is alluding to. Conincidence?  I don't think so. I heard he laid it on pretty thick. Keep in mind,
Black people adore the Clintons. They command a more than 90% approval rating.  Black people are much smarter than how neveda is portraying us to be.
by lonnette33 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:41:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

yes, the politico publishes an article based on one email.  What a joke.  And of course people who know nothing about the African-American community will repeat this bilge endlessly.  


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:34:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

well go listen to some black radio stations, i've been hearing it's not pretty as well.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:37:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

I have.  And I have heard nothing.  Again, you are repeating the claims in the ONE email Ben Smith allegedly received from an alleged African-American.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:39:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

IT WOULD have been humerous if Obama hit Hillary over the head with a Sock at the last debate.  


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:32:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Meh (none / 0)

Is that about the NH blog thing? Well, if you think anyone knew about it. Sounded like a pretty nothing thing. Shaheen's statements were really bad. Clinton needed to end it. I think Obama has worked it but it is just about over no?
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:35:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

the more of this we get the more we know who is winning and who is not.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:28:30 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 0)

I find it more humerous Jerome never seems to write anything bad about the other candidates, but always finds time to slam Barack.  It's like the man ran over his dog or something.  


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:34:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (1.00 / 1)

Maybe we should.


"Well Hillary, I looking forward to you advising me as well." - Barack Obama
by General Sherman on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:08:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

i do have a sense that he's overreaching in trying to get political points off of this.

i like both Barack and Hillary, so no real dog in this fight. but my first reaction is, damn, they're going to rip each other to shreds. Reaction #2, though, is that (particularly for Barack) better to get this out now than in the GE.

i still think they'd make a great ticket.

kumbaaaya....


by CalDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:28:48 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

But Obama is not striking back with dirt.  Its perfectly appropriate to scold Clinton for her tactics.  She should pay a price.  But, as David Gregory said tonight, this is Clinton throwing mud and Obama laughing at her.

The real danger for Clinton is that by using something that Obama himself wrote about that happened thirty-something years ago, Clinton is declaring a candidate's whole history relevant for exposition.  I think its fair to assume there are media organizations sitting on Clinton stories, but never had reason to use them.  We all know the NYTimes has a story about Bill, but that can't be all.  Clinton has given them an excuse to run them.


by Javier Doval on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:47:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

no, they can't be on the same ticket (none / 0)

If one of them gets the nomination they will pick someone very safe, like a governor or Wes Clark.


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:48:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 2)

The latter part of the post-- "if he can't handle this type of attack"-- is something I keep seeing repeated (on this and other sites). I just don't get it, though.

Obama seems to be handling it just fine. He took a charge/attack and effectively turned it, forcing the campaign making the charge to publicly apologize and fire the person who made the attack. Earlier, with the silly kidergarten item, the Obama campaign also effectively turned that, making it a point of ridicule for the Clinton campaign.

He seems to be handling these thinge very well. What am I missing?


by Democratic Victory on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:30:03 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 1)

The Republicans will attack him relentlessly for this, especially as only drug counselors and not teachers are allowed to discuss drug use with children.  

2000: the President with whom you would drink a beer

2008: the President with whom you would snort a line

Our society is quickly becoming a sesspool.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:33:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 1)

I understand that they will raise it, because, you know, they're Republicans and its what they do. But, raised now, Obama has successfully played it to his advantage. Isn't that a piece of evidence that he CAN handle it, rather than as a sign that he can't handle it?


by Democratic Victory on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:36:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Look at his tag line... He won't let a little thing like logic or the truth mess up his argument.


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:42:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

They will use it, and it will work.  Democrats may feel sympathy for the coke user, but Republicans, especially sanctimonious values voters, will punish him.  Believe me, they will cite it.

Coke user who does not support handguns.

Say goodbye to NM, CO, MT, AZ, NV, PA, OH, IA, MO


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:47:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yep, I'm sure they'll all secede from the Union (2.00 / 1)

Goodbye, New Mexico, I hardly knew thee


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:57:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

The logic of an Obama supporter:

new] Re: Is 2008 1976 All Over Again? (0.85 / 7)
HILLARY HAS NO FUCKING EXPERIENCE OUTSIDE OF 7 YEARS AS A SENATOR!  HER SOLE QUALIFICATION ON EXPERIENCE IS THAT SHE HAPPENED TO BE MARRIED TO A GUY WHO BECAME THE PRESIDENT!!  THIS BULLSHIT FANTASY THAT SHE WAS THE CONSIGLIERE OF THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION IS RIDICULOUS!!!  SHE FAILED MISERABLY IN TRYING TO PASS HER MAJOR INITIATIVE, WITH A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS NO LESS!!!!  SHE DIDN'T SERVE AS A CABINET MEMBER NOR ACT IN THAT ROLE!!!!!  SHE WAS EMBROILED IN SCANDAL AFTER SCANDAL ALONG WITH BILL!!!!!! SHE IS NO MORE EXPERIENCED THAN EDWARDS OR OBAMA, EXCEPT SHE IS THE ONLY ONE OF THE THREE TO FUCK A PRESIDENT (OR AT LEAST WE ASSUME)!!!!!!!

And you left out one of our most inexperienced Presidents who followed an incompetent President.  His name was Abraham Lincoln.  

Please Donate to Obama for President 2008
by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 07, 2007 at 10:36:16 PM EST
[ Parent | Reply to This ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:
Ga6thDem    0
misscee    2
Vox Populi    2
Mystylplx    2
Denny Crane    0
RJEvans    0
LakersFan    0


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:02:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

4 fools (none / 0)

misscee    2
Vox Populi    2
Mystylplx    2
Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:28:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

He can handle it within the context of a Democratic primary where the primary reaction seems to be against the Clinton campaign.  That's working because the Clinton campaign has let it work.  They apologized.  They fired Shaheen.

Do you think that's what Romney would do?  Hell, no.  He'd be pushing to know exactly how much coke Obama did and when exactly did he stop doing it.  And I saw a reporter asked Axelrod if Obama ever "shared" any cocaine.  Axelrod didn't know, which is not comforting (actually Axelrod's vagueness generally to specific questions was not comforting).  Sharing cocaine can be "distribution" under the drug laws.  It's stupid, but true.  

I hope to God that there's not more to this story than what's in his book.  Politicians usually get this stuff out there to innoculate themselves.  Since there's a very real possibility he's going to be the nominee, I hope he did a good enough job.  And he didn't put the bare minimum out hoping nobody would follow up.  That's what Bill Clinton did on the draft and it nearly killed him, but at least it was in the primary.  Not that it wasn't used in the general, but it was old news by then and I think that helped.


by BDB on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:09:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

74 percent of americans in a nyt poll this week said a person who has done coke can not be elected to the wh.

what about this?

no one is mentioning this.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:19:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 0)

The Clinton campaign is in a meltdown and so are their supporters it won't be pretty as she goes down though.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:33:30 PM EST

Pretty silly no? (none / 0)

clearly Obama has never been in better shape but a meltdown? I tell you who is in full meltdown - Rudy. Now in 3rd in FLORIDA - his firewall. He is over. Hillary will be there. It's going to be a tough race now I think, unless Hillary pulls out Iowa.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:37:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pretty silly no? (none / 0)

Rudy's done, McCain is done unless Hillary wins Iowa (not likely) because  he needs more indies in the GOP NH pool,looks like Romney will survive Iowa, win NH and become the mainstream conservative who always wins the GOP primary.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:43:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pretty silly no? (none / 0)

Totally agree. I think it is Romney's now. Heck, I always thought it was going to be Romney.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:45:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pretty silly no? (none / 0)

And Romney has already attacked Obama for the latter's use of coke and other illegal substances.  


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:51:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We'll see how long that lasts (none / 0)

in a GOP primary, he may think it works. Personally I would be surprised to hear another word about it. I could be wrong I suppose.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:55:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We'll see how long that lasts (none / 0)

If Romney doesn't use it in the general (and I think he's all they have, which is pathetic), then it will come back in those anonymous emails.  It'll be coke using, gun banning, Muslim black guy.  

And that's actually not a knock on Obama's electability.  According to several sources the emails about Clinton are worse (which is why I think they haven't gotten the same attention, from what I can tell most are unprintable in a family newspaper).

Whoever the Democratic nominee is, they will be smeared.  They always are and this time the Republicans have nothing else.  Given that the frontrunners are a woman and African American, I think we can expect the usual smears with a healthy dose of racism or misogyny (although the latter is more dangerous because a majority of the electorate are women).  

The only reason I think Clinton can withstand them is that they've already said everything they can say about her and so nothing will be new.  It's not because I think they will say less.  The Republicans' backs are to the wall, they have a failed president and no new ideas.  I expect this election to be even nastier than 2000 or 2004 and that is saying something.


by BDB on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:15:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We'll see how long that lasts (none / 0)

talk radio would combine cocaine {first candidate to ever admit hard drug use} with obamas call to release 10s of thousands of convicted violent crack dealers and users on the streets with - his being on the record {they will dismiss the denials] wanting to ban hand guns and the rights of citizens to use a firearm in a home invasion {state senate vote}

he and we would be dead as soon as he became our nominee.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:44:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pretty silly no? (none / 0)

I agree that Rudy is done, and so is McCain.  Its probably between Huckabee, Romney and Thompson.  And who wins?  Obama.  That's because Obama's experience matches up well with each of them.  First, Obama is currently in office while none of them is.  ROmney is a one-term governor, Thompson served one full term and a quarter in the senate, and Huckabee has admitted he has no foreign policy experience.  The experience card can pretty much be torn up.


by Javier Doval on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 04:00:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

well when Mark Penn is all over TV (2.00 / 0)

that's a meltdown. it's more her supporters that are panicing rather than Hillary, but some of the CW pushers believe her campaign is teetering on the brink.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:41:49 PM EST

Re: well when Mark Penn is all over TV (none / 0)

i see you are incapable of analyzing news stories.  i also notice you are bombarding this thread with falsehoods.  are you relying on ann kornblut's wapo story?  that was based on questionable sources and information from over a two month span.

you and others have no access to the clinton campaign, and these stories are always written during a competitive campaign.  anyone who has analyzed politics for more than one election cycle knows this.

you are a novice, an ingenue, and this explains why you support obama.  i guess drinking beer with bush in 2000 was not enough.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:45:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That got personal awful quick (none / 0)


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:47:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That got personal awful quick (none / 0)

yes.  her insulting comments and insinuations throught this primary season have been very personal.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:49:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That got personal awful quick (none / 0)

Heh. Doesn't it always? I can laugh about it now, but in 04, I was cursing Jerome and Markos for shilling for Dean. I was a Clarkie.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:49:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well when Mark Penn is all over TV (none / 0)

kornblut is nuts,  I was with her at the convention in 04 and at an event, she had a minor nervous breakdown right in front of me.

she slimed gore as badly as anybody in 2000.

hate her work. huge liar.

thats why both the nyt and the wp fought over her services.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:12:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Problem with drugs? (none / 0)

Oh come now. You're better than that. There is no problem. It is an attack that simply will not work. The GOP will not even use it.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:42:30 PM EST

Re: Problem with drugs? (none / 0)

Thanks for bringing some sanity/perspective to this post and thread.


Visit DebateScoop
by demondeac on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:08:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Problem with drugs? (none / 0)

Oh boy, hooked good.


by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:17:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Problem with drugs? (none / 0)

If hooked there, and especially by BTD, color me chagrined.

Bush used coke, too (and gave it to friends and sold it). Who would you rather have a snort with, Barry or W?


Visit DebateScoop
by demondeac on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:35:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Problem with drugs? (none / 0)

Dude, I did the grateful dead already this life.


by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:45:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Problem with drugs? (none / 0)

Oh yeah, the GOP will use it. You can debate whether it will work or not but I guarantee they will use it.

Take the word of someone who lives among tons of Republican scum.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:45:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

thats ludicrous - romney already has!! (none / 0)

a new nytmes poll sad that 74% of Americans believe a candidate who has done cocaine CAN NOT BE ELECTED President.

Think that the GOP is just gonna leave that low hanging fruit hanging?

ridiculous.

polls a week old and never mentioned once during this flap.  Thats odd isnt it?


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:58:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (1.00 / 2)

Is Jerome shorting Obama contracts on Intrade? Hard to explain the pre-occupation.


Visit DebateScoop
by demondeac on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:42:36 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

What is the price right now?
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:46:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

.32 for winning the Dem nomination (short positions would take a 200% loss in the event of an Obama win).

.5 for Iowa.


Visit DebateScoop
by demondeac on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:24:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

brits have hill 1 to 3 for hill and obama at 8 to 1

makes much more sense.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:32:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

He doesn't like Obama.  I'm still not sure I understand the reasoning... on the surface, I have seen him post he doesn't think he can win and Jerome subscribes to the school of thought of get any Dem in the WH with a filibuster proof majority and THEN we cna assert a progressive agenda... which makes sense then of why he went to work for Warner, whom I think is a good guy and would be a good GE candidate but I would hardly say has impressive progressive credentials.  Myself and many others disagree with this viewpoint and think it is wishful thinking... just like the Religious Right thought their agenda would be pushed after the 2004 elections.  With Obama though, it almost seems personal at times.  I'm sure he'd disagree, but at times he seems to attack Obama harder than he hits any of the GOPers.  I noticed a lack of front page posts from him and then when Obama started gaining momentum, he suddenly seems to be posting all the more... granted, it could all be coincidence.  I don't think Jerome is a bad guy at all, it just feels at times like he has a personal axe to grind with Obama.  I think Jerome actually is a very good writer (unlike Taylor Marsh, whom I think is terrible and who also seems to have an axe to grind.)  All I'm saying is this is hardly the first time a candidate this cycle has been a tad hypocritical on an issue, yet I don't recall the vehement front page posts attacking those other candidate.  


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:50:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I hate to say this, but I think the root of Jerome's anti-Obama attitude is a gruge with Robert Gibbs.  Jerome mentions Gibbs and his actions in 2003 in countless Obama posts.

Its a bummer, because I used to respect Jerome, but its getting harder and harder to read this blog.


by MNDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:26:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Gibbs is a scumbag (none / 0)

and was especially one in 2003. Jerome has good reason to detest him.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:35:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ibid (none / 0)


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:34:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Nah, it's not the root at all.

However, I don't mind it when he's in the story, as he is scum and will have to make a public apology to Dean and his supporters for me to ever think differently.

If you have a problem with me because I think Gibbs is scum, that's your problem.


by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:35:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I think their families were fuedin' in the old country...


by moreaxe on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:51:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

lol, no. I'm just wondering about electability.


by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:54:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Your good sense of humor is noted and appreciated. Good to be able to laugh, especially when so many take themselves and some of these blog threads just a little too seriously.

As for electability, is the skirmish in question not evidence for Obama's electability? He and his campaign seem to be quite adept at "having it both ways" and making the attackers look bad while maintaining the appearance of staying above the fray.

I for one, see it as a virtue to have a candidate who is a media darling. The media have Obama's back. The media is in love with its own narrative (see also McCain, John. Straight Talking Moderate) and the narrative says Obama is a new kind of transcendent politician. I'm glad he's a liberal Democrat and not a Republican.


Visit DebateScoop
by demondeac on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:19:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Doesn't the fact that he's the media darling of Fox News and not Paul Krugman raise any concerns?


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:49:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

With regard to electability in the general election, the topic of this part of the thread, no. Just the opposite, in fact.

I would prefer he and the other front runners all were for single-payer health care.

But if he is nominated, Krugman will be busy attacking the GOP nominee.


Visit DebateScoop
by demondeac on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:04:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

chris frigging matthews...


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:37:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I almost took MyDD off my reader acct (2.00 / 2)

but then I realized I'd be missing some good laughs while Jerome freaks out about Barack overtaking Hillary in Iowa and New Hampshire Polls.  

I still think one day soon he's going to admit it was all snark to mess with your heads...


by moreaxe on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:45:00 PM EST

Re: I almost took MyDD off my reader acct (none / 0)

if it were only snark.

jerome has issues.


I really don't understand how that is an attack; lol. ~ by Jerome Armstrong
by jello on Tue Dec 18, 2007 at 05:53:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (1.00 / 1)

especially if Obama hires him.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:46:06 PM EST

Cheap shot (none / 0)

And bullshit. Why is it hard to believe Jerome is just writing what he thinks?
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:47:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Cheap shot (none / 0)

just continuing the snark!


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:51:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Cheap shot (none / 0)

Missed the snark. Will remove the rating.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:06:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Cheap shot (none / 0)

I believe he is writing what he thinks... my issue is that other candidates have had similiar hypocrisies during this cycle and I don't remember the postings about them from Jerome.  Granted he could have been busy, but if you are going to call out an act CALL IT OUT FOR ALL CANDIDATES, not just one you don't seem to like for what ever reason.


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:52:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fair point (none / 0)

But I may have missed some of those posts. But the truth is I write a lot on Obama too. And most of it critical. In a lot of ways it is a credit to him, his is the most interesting story.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:57:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (2.00 / 1)

I have to shrug about the call for quota's on blog posts... you are right, it's whats interesting. The entire '07 campaign has been a pivot off of Obama for the most part. My opinion is that he's a gamble in the general, and I'll continue to point out why I think that-- let him prove me wrong, that'd be great.


by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:12:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

On Quotas for posts (none / 0)

True.
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:19:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

I'd have to say, in my opinion, that Clinton is a bigger gamble in the general.  The negatives about her are well known by the Republicans and I have to believe the Republican operatives are heartened by her campaign's lack of skill in fighting back against Obama in the primary now.

I mean that was one of her main selling points supposedly, that she knew how to stand up and beat the VWRC.  She certainly hasn't sold me on that in the past month or so.


A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy. - Teddy Roosevelt
by minvis on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:46:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

Actually what the GOP is saying that her negatives are set where as Obama's can be driven sky high. Kerry didn't have high negatives either. Obama's will be higher than Hillary's after the GOP gets done with him.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:51:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

The negative connotations of Clinton are set, but I don't think anyone can say for sure that her disapproval rating can't get higher.  Plus, purely from an electability standpoint, why do we as Democrats want to go into a general election with someone who already has negative ratings over 50%.

Obama is not even my first choice, but other than your opinion what proof do you have that Obama's negatives will be above Hillary's?


A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy. - Teddy Roosevelt
by minvis on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:01:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

I'm stating what the GOP has said. They are also saying that he hasn't been fully vetted in the Washington Post. Sounds like they might have some good oppo research on hand.

The GOP went into 2004 with Bush's negatives over 50%, iirc 54%, so you really cant say exactly how much effect it will have when it comes to voting. Some of the 50% won't even show up to vote. And you are assuming that those feelings are strong versus just dislike somewhat.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:55:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

Obama's negatives can be higher because he is an unknown. If he has established something like a positive 40% then his negatives can go up to 60%. It's easier to define from scratch than to change the numbers on someone known.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:57:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

There is a difference between can be and will be.  Your first assertion was that Obama's negatives will be higher than Hillary.  That is a blanket statement of what you think will be a fact.  I can live with you believing that his negative "could" rise higher than Hillary's but stating as fact that they will.  No way!


A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy. - Teddy Roosevelt
by minvis on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:22:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

Well that's what the GOP is putting out there.

You're right though. I should have said could instead of would.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 08:17:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

Hey there, I didn't notice you were back around, very cool.


by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:38:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks Jerome (none / 0)

It's good to hear from you. I hope all is well. And I kinda got tired of the irrational debate on other sites.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:58:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

you must be kidding Kerry had really high negatives no one liked kerry they just voted for him because they though he could beat bush.


by orin76 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:47:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair point (none / 0)

His negatives were only high AFTER the GOP started "defining" him.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 09:41:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

So then... (none / 0)

...who is the anti-Obama?

Who is the most electable?


What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:50:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This sounds rather petty... NT (none / 0)

 


"Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forward." - Soren Kierkegaard
by SixthElement on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:47:12 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Axelrod was on national TV last night.  This is the predictable response.


by Piuma on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:48:54 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Jerome, you do know that you're hurting this blog, right?

Don't you think the right move for you is to resign?


by Kal on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:51:50 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 1)

That's just plain stupid, Kal.  Jerome does a good job.  


by yitbos96bb on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:53:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well, I don't like it at all, but (none / 0)

Hey , if Obama can go through the drug issue right now and still win Iowa , i doubt the media would want to spend more time on it.

Also , lets not forget that Huckabee has some problem of his own...Letting loose a rapist out of jail when some folks begged you to not do it , then have the same rapist that you freed when many were warning you against it , to raped and kill...This is much worst then a guy who did drug during his teenager years.

I'm hearing that Obama has the momentum in Iowa but whether this drug issue can slow him down a bit is anyone guess.

I think the Clinton are desperately trying to slow his momentum right now and they are throwing everything at him....The problem here is that Hillary has hit a ceiling and she's probably maxed out as far as support...Second choices voters does not favor her and you better believe undecided will not break to her.


by Prodigy on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:54:44 PM EST

Kos and Chris declared--Jerome? (none / 0)

Is Jerome going to endorse or supporting anyone?

I think he is supporting Clinton.


by jasmine on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:56:35 PM EST

No (2.00 / 1)

I think having went into this at first working for someone, I'm immune to actually backing anyone as a supporter. For the longest time I was hoping Gore would get in. If I had a preference I would, I just don't. Maybe I will later, I'll tell who I wind up voting for in VA in March.


by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:24:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No (none / 0)

I have a mind like an elephant. I recall you saying that you would probably write in Elizabeth Edwards name, if you voted.

:)


Dare to be free.
by misscee on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 10:33:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I wonder (none / 0)

I've been wondering whether the story is true or not. I know that Obama/mainstream media keep saying that the Clinton campaign is in meltdown mode b/c they won't let the story die.

But there are a few things that I just can't shake. First, the Clintons have been in the campaign business for a long time. Both President and Senator Clintons worked on McGovern's campaign. Senator Clinton worked on Jimmy Carter's campaign in 1976 in Indiana. They both collaberated on Bill's campaign in 1992 and 1996. I just don't think that they would float a rumor/innuendo out there w/o backing it up in some way.

But for the sake of argument, what if they did decide to float a rumor about Obama selling drugs? Would the huge backlash by the AA community be worth the flack they received especially if it was just a rumor?

Third, why would they let the story continue to play it self out with first Mark Penn's appearance on Hardball and then today's appearance by HRC where she said that she was fully vetted?

Fourth, I noticed that in her press availability today HRC said in response to a question about whether it was fair to attack Obama for past drug use, her campaign wouldn't make it an issue. But that doesn't mean a 527 wouldn't make it an issue, if the allegations are true, would it. Will we see a 527 or someone who knew Obama from the past pop up to make these allegations against him this next week?

My final thoughts are would someone have enough hubris to get in the presidential race if that person had a past where he sold drugs? Would he think that he could get away with it in the press? Other opponents wouldn't take a shot at him if they found out? Could we have a Stephen Glass candidate in our midst?

I guess anything is possible in politics, right?


by ademption on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 09:59:57 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

The rule of thump with Jerome is to never take whatever he says about Obama seriously.

He's not a bias nor fair when he writes about Obama and as long as you uderstad that , i thik it's fine.

There should be a disclaimer stating that he just hate Obama so that new readers does not get fooled by thinking he's bias.


by Prodigy on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:02:25 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I actually get a kick of this type of response because it reflects not only an immaturity but more importantly an awareness that Obama is getting the better of Clinton.  The media is tearing her apart.  Fox loves this.  They are running with the story that her campaign is in shambles and she is swinging wildly.  Kelly Anne (the blonde pollster) said tonight that Bill Clinton is sabotaging Hillary because he has no desire to live under the spotlight again.  

Keith Ohlberman also tore Hillary a new one and showed the video of a Hillary precint captain switch to Obama.  ABC and CNN talked about Clinton's new ad with her mother and one of Bill's kids.  They treated it as pathetic.

The great thing is that the media always points out that Obama was upfront with his drug experimentation in his book.  And they love to remind people that Bill and Hillary claim they didn't inhale.

So, there is only reason to rejoice.


by Javier Doval on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:05:28 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

We still do not know how this narrative would play out and whether anyone benefit...People on the ground in Iowa still does not see any effect yet.

One thing for sure is that Hillary is not/will not be coming out of it looking good and maybe she does not care and all she cares about is slowing down any type of momentum Obama has right now and this is why they wanted to put the drug stuff out there so badly.


by Prodigy on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:26:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

The idea that the length of time this remains a story has anything to do with the Republicans ability to "re-open the issue", as Jerome now claims in the update, is blatantly absurd, and really is so naive you can't even imagine it is being said with a straight face from someone in the political consulting business. You can be damn sure the Republicans have poured over Obama's two books long ago just as they've poured over every association the Clintons have had since he left office.  


by Piuma on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:26:17 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I do think that the longer this thing stays out there , the more likely it wont be an issue for the general election if Obama wins the nomination.

The media would regard the drug issue as old news since they sped days talking about it during the democratic nomination.

Unless they get fresh materials to work with that is newsworthy , i doubt the drug issue will be something the media would digg into if Obama makes it to the general election.


by Prodigy on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:31:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 1)

Let me say this.

If the drug issue does not hurt Obama right now , i doubt it will hurt him in the general election.


by Prodigy on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:32:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

It depends.  If Romney or another Republican cuts advertisements with school drug counselors condemning Obama, the media will discuss it.  


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:35:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

There is no candidate, none, who is immune to having Republicans create attack ads on an issue they want to spin from nothing into something bad.  This constant refrain and the fear it is supposed to inspire is really not worthy of discussion.


by Piuma on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:39:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Right ... because an ex-drug user telling kids what a bad move using is is not done every day at schools.

Oh wait Obama just did that a few weeks ago.


by JoeCoaster on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:43:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

But drug counselors normally ask former users who received rehabilitation and training to discuss their addiction.  obama lacks such training, which is why this can be controversial.  discuss this with any educator.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:47:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Exactly.  Which is why I can't imagine ever Jerome believes what he wrote.


by Piuma on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:36:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

It is Hillary who has kept this story going! When you read the articles they are all about what Hillary said how she doesn't condone etc...

Hillary has kept it going.

On day one Shaheen apologized , then Shaheen resigned on day 2, and today has been all about how Hillary apologized yesterday and her answering questions about it.

Its Hillary who has kept it going.

I am not sure what her campaign is after.

Do they feel they need to get out in front over and over again because the damage to her campaign is so strong?


Slash and burn politics baby! Say anything do anything lie cheat steal railroad the opposition into submission: CLINTON FORMULA FOR 2008.
by crackityjones on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:32:12 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

maybe they think the narrative could hurt Obama among caucus goers.

When you take Obama's skin color and add in "cocaine" , i could see some white folks getting real nervous and my guess is this is what the Clintons wants...They want to put doubts into anyone thats even thinking about backing Obama.

On the other hand , black people arent stupid and Obama could hurt them with it.

Obama has already send emails about the issue to all his supporters and i doubt the Clintons can be too please by that...Why??..Because those black voters that are on Obama's side were once on Clinton's side and the Clintons will eventually need those folks to not only win the primary , but the general.

I havent been listening to any black radio lately , but ive heard from a few people that some folks are following the 'Obama is a drug dealer" narrative and if the black community get words that the Clinton are trying to push this stuff , it could really tarnish the Clintons among black voters.


by Prodigy on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:41:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I agree with this completely. They may be consciously pushing the narrative while "apologizing" for it.....

If so it would be incredibly underhanded but not beneath the Clintons. Whats incredible is that people believe Obama is keeping this in the news.


Slash and burn politics baby! Say anything do anything lie cheat steal railroad the opposition into submission: CLINTON FORMULA FOR 2008.
by crackityjones on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:31:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's so cool... (none / 0)

now that MyDD has become a Hillary supporter chat room for Daily Kos gossip.

This place is much cooler than it used to be.

Oh and I liked the nice use of the word "smack" in the lede. Swell framing.


What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:42:23 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

There is no difference between Obama's current indignation over drugs and Hillary's indignation any time any one brings up Bill's penis.


by aiko on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:50:47 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

lol

hillary inhaled.


I really don't understand how that is an attack; lol. ~ by Jerome Armstrong
by jello on Tue Dec 18, 2007 at 05:57:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Not to make people angry - but there is something to the vetting process and Obama is really very new to the scene.  His history and his life are not really known and though I guess in the back of my mind I remembered the story of Obama and cocaine, I had forgotten it.  As a realistic front runner for the Presidency, maybe I should not have forgotten about it - not because of what it meant to me, but what it probably means to the bigger number of voters we want to garner next year.  And no - the Republicans or a 527 will not let him or us forget his cocaine use, or apologize to him for mentioning it if he is our nominee.  The battles of the 60's have not ended, unfortunately.


by NYMARJ on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 10:58:26 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 1)

There's something most of the posters here seem to be missing:

On the front burner, the talk might be about Hillary's campaign but on the backburner there's the constant refrain of "Obama did cocaine", "Obama did cocaine". Voters are deciding right now and the fact that they are still talking it tonight and probably on the Sunday shows can not be good. Don't underestimate this kind of stuff. The majority of Democrats don't have a lot of confidence in Obama due to his experience etc. It could have an effect. Once some polls come out next week we'll see if it worked against Obama.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:11:56 PM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

And remember the swift boat stuff? They were constantly running the ads but then talking about how they were wrong etc. Well, the debunking didn't seem to get through to the public but the falsities did.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:13:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I disagree Jerome re: future attacks (none / 0)

This nearly insulates Obama from any future attacks in this regard.  It's quite similar to how the Republicans hyped the Dan Rather Memo about Bush's national guard duty...it totally took any wind out of any future attacks on Bush's guard record.


by moreaxe on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:23:56 PM EST

Re: I disagree Jerome re: future attacks (none / 0)

I agree here...If this stuff does not take out Obama right now , i doubt it will kill him in the general election because the media will not see anny reason tolook into it when the spent days talking about it during the democratic nomination.

Also , make o mistake , the Clintons are trying to hurt Obama with this and you're a fool if you think the Clinton are worried about Obama electability..

Like ive stated before , no one knows who this new narrative will help and while the media is definately killing the Clintons as 'attack machine' , the voters could pretty much come to a different conclusion and come down against Obama.

I'm still confident Edwards will not win the caucus because there will be at least 10,00 new caucus goers and most of them wont be caucusing for Edwards.

For Edwards to win , he basically has to pray that Obama/Clinton doesnt bring in new caucus goers...He needs about the same amount of people who attended the 2004 caucus , to attend the 2008 caucus.


by Prodigy on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 11:58:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

O-bomb-a (none / 0)

I think all this nonsense between Hillary and Obama needs to stop.

I, too, am concerend about how Obama will handle
all this in a general election.  We could nominate
someone who will be a worse candidate than Dukakis and Kerry combined.  He may be doing better than Clinton some GE matchups now, but the polls can and will change once the GOP attack machine ramps up.

Who would you trust in response--Clinton or Obama?


by mikelow1885 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:05:29 AM EST

Re: O-bomb-a (2.00 / 1)

If the past two weeks is any indication, Obama.  


by Piuma on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:34:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: O-bomb-a (none / 0)

No way.  Hillary simply does not want to destroy a fellow Senator.  the GOP will have no tolerance for Obama's sanctimony and vapidity.  

They are ready to pounce.


by truthteller2007 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:42:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: O-bomb-a (none / 0)

If the last 15 years is any indication, I wil go with Clinton. Obama made a big deal out a gaffe by a Democrat. Republicans will outright lie, run ads saying he was a drug dealer or he still smokes.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:46:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

It doesn't matter. The media won't cover Obama's insults to Senator Clinton. They got what they wanted, a horse race.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:43:31 AM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (2.00 / 1)

Obama is winning now because the democrats learned that you actually have to like the person your nominating.


by orin76 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 12:50:01 AM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I am a true democrat, one that is real and authentic, and I despise Obama.  


by truthteller2007 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:04:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Like AND trust.  Not only is Hillary not liked but she isn't trusted.  When someone calls you a "congenital liar" you have a problem with the truth.  The first characteristic of leadership is trust and Hillary lacks it.


by Javier Doval on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 04:08:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

This seems to be a tepid defense of Mark Penn's Willie Horton style campaign tactics.  I hardly come on this site anymore because of the seething Obama hatred here, but c'mon, no need to defend the indefensible.  Obama had every right to react like he did, and frankly, he has been above the fray on this one when he didn't have to be.  If you watched Hardball today, it was Trippi who took most offense to Hillary's strategy, not Axelrod.

And to the anti-Obama trolls like Truthteller, please take into consideration that the man you're slamming with reckless abandon may in fact be the Democratic nominee for President.  There are far worse politicians out there to demonize as the Antichrist.  I'd have a hard time believing that truthteller insults George Bush any more viciously than Obama.

I'm out of this site until after the primaries.  It's too dangerous with all the torches and pitchforks.


"The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country." - Robert F. Kennedy
by dmfox on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:31:31 AM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I am  enjoying the death of the "naderite" and "pino" name-calling posts, diaries and comments.

I come to MyDD to catch up on the negativity in the news. It's all right here on the front page and recommended diaries. You can read a couple lines of the "cut-and paste diaries," peruse the "lookee see the latest polls diaries" (although there's less of them now,) laugh at the jokes and jokers, make a post or two, and move on.

Even though most of these diaries are sillary, I can't fault anyone. I like to indulge in negativity myself, every now and then. It's not personal and helps one to let off some steam.

This is a great site. You can even find brilliant commentary if you ignore the noise.


Dare to be free.
by misscee on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 10:28:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

This seems to be a tepid defense of Mark Penn's Willie Horton style campaign tactics.  I hardly come on this site anymore because of the seething Obama hatred here, but c'mon, no need to defend the indefensible.  Obama had every right to react like he did, and frankly, he has been above the fray on this one when he didn't have to be.  If you watched Hardball today, it was Trippi who took most offense to Hillary's strategy, not Axelrod.

And to the anti-Obama trolls like Truthteller, please take into consideration that the man you're slamming with reckless abandon may in fact be the Democratic nominee for President.  There are far worse politicians out there to demonize as the Antichrist.  I'd have a hard time believing that truthteller insults George Bush any more viciously than Obama.

I'm out of this site until after the primaries.  It's too dangerous with all the torches and pitchforks.


"The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country." - Robert F. Kennedy
by dmfox on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:31:53 AM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

I fear Republicans will cite Obama's relationship with Rezko during the general if Obama is either the nominee or the VP.  I can already visualize the advertisements.  What if the GOP discovers all the articles I have been discussing on this site?  It would be a disaster.


by truthteller2007 on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 06:41:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yucky (2.00 / 1)

This is so lame. There are many legitimate criticisms to be made of Obama's campaign - this isn't one of them. Jerome's anti-Obama argument is too clever by half: first Obama is said to not be able to punch back, and then when he is criticized for landing a punch. He is making political hay out of an attack by an opponent and inoculating himself against further attacks later on by Republicans. As someone who was concerned that Obama had painted himself into a corner with the rhetoric of "a new politics" it makes me happy to see him turning Hillary's attack back at her.

Give the man some credit. I don't know what makes you so wild eyed with contempt for Obama, but it's disconcerting. Chill hombre.


by Ozymandias on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 02:22:31 AM EST

Re: Yucky (none / 0)

first Obama is said to not be able to punch back, and then when he is criticized for landing a punch.

soo true.


I really don't understand how that is an attack; lol. ~ by Jerome Armstrong
by jello on Tue Dec 18, 2007 at 06:03:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama: All Talk, No Walk (none / 0)

Don't forget "McClurkin-Gate", "My-Space-Gate",  "Geffen-Gate", and the latest John Millin-Gate.

I seriously doubt that the media will hold Obama accountable for his hypocrisy here.  After all, accountability is a standard to which only Clinton is held.


by BigBoyBlue on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 11:32:25 AM EST

Re: Preacher Barack Obama (none / 0)

Jerome,

Great Diary. My fear about Obama supporters is that many of them are not actually Democrats. They seems to be taking the page right out of the GOP and Naders attack against Gore. Remember Nader saying there was no difference between Gore and Bush. Obama says the exact same thing when he calls Clinton Bush-Cheney light. It would be laughable, if it wasn't coming from a contender for the Democratic Presidential nomination.

I hope Obama crashes soon and ends his political career. Being from Illinois, I am looking forward to campaigning against him in his senate re-election primary in 2010.


by moi moi on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:21:22 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.