Next one's from Carrie Budoff Brown (Politico) and points to a real chink in BO's armor.  He's built his run for the White House on his eloquence and soaring rhetoric.  One or two great speeches and he's off to the races folks.  And yet... for a guy who's so good with words, he really stepped in it during that $1,000 per head fundraiser last week.  And this wasn't the first time he's blown it with workin' folks...

Barack Obama's flip side revealed

Barack Obama's remarks on small town America were an off-key note from a politician who has rocketed to the top by being brilliantly on-key.

At the same time, the comments were not a total departure: On the campaign trail, Obama can reveal moments of aloofness or tone deaf reactions that belie his image as the epitome of polished.

Then his donors at this $1,000 per ticket fundraiser at the home of developer Alex Mehran asked him what they'd find in Pennsylvania when they went out to campaign for him. He said hey had to work to do.

"What I found to be most revealing was that these remarks were made several thousand miles from us, at a very expensive fundraising campaign event in a very upscale location where he did not think any of us were going to hear what he would say," said Harrisburg Mayor Stephen R. Reed, a Clinton supporter. "It invites the question of what else does this candidate think about all the different people who make up our redder, diverse nation."

At a New Hampshire roundtable in December, Obama betrayed little emotion as one participant sobbed while describing her situation: She lost her job on her 65th birthday, struggles to afford her $2,900 monthly prescription drug costs, and lives in 30-year-old trailer where the thermostat is set at 64 degrees

At the same event, he later mentioned how the success of his book had allowed him to buy a big house. He was making a point about inequities in the tax system, but the story felt misplaced in the midst of such dire tales.

Obama used to tell folks in Iowa about a phone conversation with his wife, who said this year was the right time to run for president because they are "still almost normal." In other words, they not so rich as they might be in a few years - after a term in the senate and money from the book deals.

"Michelle's point was, in eight years from now, 10 years from now, we may still be nice people, but we may be in this orbit where we just don't remember, we don't hear people's voices anymore," Obama explained at the time.

Two women in the Sioux City audience were not impressed.

"That was a mistake," said Lindsay Pelchat, 30. "That was a big mistake."  

"Don't ever forget where you come from," her friend, Paula Yasat, 53, piped in.

"Does that mean in the next election he's already going to start losing sight of the middle class?" Pelchat asked.

The women approached Obama afterward to tell him they remained undecided.

"What do I need to do?" Obama asked, almost disbelieving. "You're really making us work."

This sounds a lot like that more recent encounter with a skeptical voter, when he asked her if he needed to get down on his knees, and then offered her a kiss for her vote.

Sen. Barack Obama approached first overflow in the parking lot outside of the Scranton town hall, and immediately went to Denise Mercuri, a pharmacist from Dunmore who was wearing a Hillary Clinton button. She held an Obama button in her hand, and he asked what he needed to do to get her to wear his instead of his rival's.

"What do I need to do? Do you want me on my knees?" he asked.
He then conceded, keeping with his flirty trend of the day (see earlier report), "I'll give you a kiss."

Poor guy.  They're making him work.  Didn't he realize that running for President would be hard work?

So this all started at a $1,000 per ticket fundraiser at some guy's home?  No press - private home - 300 to 400 of his rich supporters in San Francisco.  No wonder Obama felt comfortable letting it all hang out.  I guess he felt safe in saying that sort of thing knowing there was little or no chance that anyone living in a small town in PA and had fallen on hard times could ever afford to go to anything that cost $1,000.  Seriously - that's a month's worth of mortgage payment / rent, utilities and groceries for a lot of families.  And to think someone could afford to drop that kind of money to spend what - maybe an hour with the anointed one?

Talk about two different Americas guys.

CNN got an exclusive interview with Mayhill Fowler about the event and how she got the scoop...

The talking heads take over at about the 5 minute mark but Mayhill's pretty interesting.

Mike Allen put up a great summary of why the now-famous "cling" comments are going to continue to clobber Obama from here on out.  I won't post the article or all 12 points here (that would be a no-no) but here are a handful - go check out the article for the whole list...

12 reasons 'bitter' is bad for Obama

#2

If you are going to say something that makes you sound like a clueless liberal, don't say it in San Francisco. Obama's views might have been received very differently if he had expressed them in public to Pennsylvania voters, saying he understood and could alleviate their frustrations.

#5

Some hard-working Americans find it insulting when rich elites explain away things dear to their hearts as desperation. It would be like a white politician telling blacks they cling to charismatic churches to compensate for their plight.. And it vindicates centrist Democrats who have been arguing for a decade that their party has allowed itself to look culturally out of touch with the American mainstream.

#7 - 9

It gives the Clinton campaign new arguments for trying to recruit superdelegates, the Democratic elected officials and other insiders who get a vote on the nomination. A moderate politician from a swing district, for example, might not want to have to explain support for a candidate who is being hammered as a liberal. And Clinton's agents can claim that for all the talk of her being divisive, Obama has provided plenty of fodder to energize Republicans.

It helps Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) frame a potential race against Obama, even though both of them have found support among independents. Now Republicans have a simple, easily repeated line of attack to use against Obama as an out-of-touch snob, as they had with Sen. John F. Kerry after he blundered by commenting about military funding, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."

The comments play directly into an already-established narrative about his candidacy. Clinton supporters have been arguing that Obama has limited appeal beyond upscale

Democrats -- the so-called latte liberals. You can't win red states if people there don't like you. "Elites need to understand that middle-class Americans view values and culture as more important than mere trickery," said Paul Begala, a Clinton backer. "Democrats have to respect their values and reflect their values, not condescend to them as if they were children who've been bamboozled."

Mike Allen over at Politico posted something which pretty much summarizes how BO's acted in the aftermath of this hitting the light of day.  First Obama describes any criticism of his comments as "rich".  Then he admits he could have worded things better.  Later he claims he deeply regretted it if anyone was offended.  Round four and we see him saying he chose his words badly.  Allen wraps it all up with the following...

Radical Re-interpretation. Says it 'may have been clumsy' but he meant it as a compliment." ("What I was saying is that when economic hardship hits in these communities, what people have is- they've got family, they've got their faith., they've got the traditions that have been passed on to them from generation to generation. Those aren't bad things.")

And since that was posted I would add one more... when all else fails - blame Hillary and accuse her of using GOP tactics in how she points out their differences on this point.

Umm... he does realize this is the big show - grown up politics right?  I mean I know he's never faced a tough opponent before but he's old enough to have seen the primary season unfold in years past.  Does he honestly expect us to believe that Dean, Kerry et al treated each other with kid gloves. Or more insulting than that - does he expect us to believe that if things were reversed, that he wouldn't have jumped on this story with everything he's got in his arsenal?

Mickey Kaus posted an interesting take on this over on Slate's site.  He raises a good point in that Obama lumped a reliance on faith with bigotry and intolerance in his San Francisco comments.  At least he went on to clarify that he thought clinging to faith was a good thing.  Take a look at what he said about BO's comments...

What's the Matter With Obama?  The Four Sins of "Cling"

It lumps together things Obama wants us to think he thinks are good (religion) with things he undoubtedly thinks are bad (racism, anti-immigrant sentiment). I suppose it's logically possible to say 'these Pennsylvania voters are so bitter and frustrated that they cling to both good things and bad things,." but the implication is that these are all things he thinks are unfortunate and need explaining (because, his context suggests, they prevent voters from doing the right thing and voting for ... him).

Yes, he's condescending. It's not just that in explaining everyone to everyone Obama winds up patronizing everyone. He doesn't patronize everyone equally. Specifically, he regards the views of these Pennsylvanians as epiphenomena- -byproducts of economic stagnation-- in a way he doesn't regard, say, his own views as epiphenomena. ** Once the Pennsylvanians get some jobs back, they'll change and become as enlightened as Obama the San Franciscans to whom he was talking. That's the clear logic of his argument. Superiority of this sort--not crediting the authenticity and standing of your subject's views--is a violation of social equality, which is a more important value for Americans than money equality. Liiberals tend to lose elections when they forget that.

Now I don't often quote from much of anyone but Paul Krugman at the New York Times, but the last two paragraphs of this column sums everything up quite nicely...

What does this mean for Obama's presidential prospects? He's disdainful of small-town America -- one might say, of bourgeois America. He's usually good at disguising this. But in San Francisco the mask slipped. And it's not so easy to get elected by a citizenry you patronize.

And what are the grounds for his supercilious disdain? If he were a war hero, if he had a career of remarkable civic achievement or public service -- then he could perhaps be excused an unattractive but in a sense understandable hauteur. But what has Barack Obama accomplished that entitles him to look down on his fellow Americans?

Obama said folks are clinging to guns and bibles - called them bitter.  I don't care how hard you try to spin this gang, he comes across as if he's looking down on folks.  So... what exactly has he done that would entitle him to look down upon others?