MyDD :: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright

The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright

by mtg44234, Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:23:49 PM EST

Back in 2004, Howard Dean did not place first in the Iowa Caucus. Then it came, that famous scream of his. The media decided it was over for him. The scream was played over and over and over. He never recovered. Kerry went on to lose the election that the Dark Horse Dean himself may have won.

Now we have Rev. Wright. Everybody has heard his sermons. Everybody saw his press conference and his speeches last week. Everybody knows that Obama has a twenty year relationship with this man. But yet, the media has not decided it is not over for him. Instead of examining his record today, Tim Russert lets Obama respond to everything HRC has stated this week.

Just sit back and think about this. The media coverage for a scream that apparently not everyone heard in that hall compared to a Pastor, a Spiritual Advisor to a presidential candidate, that has stated "truths" according to him about the U.S.A.

Now, Washington Post reporter David Broder (NBC, 10/12/03) suggested that the Dean campaign was part of "a clear kind of anti-establishment rumble in the country," raising the possibility that "we're in for a kind of a wild ride where even conceivably a new party or independent candidate could muddy the picture." Now, replace the Dean with the word Obama and think about how Bloomberg was thinking about running for president.

We need to be cautious about this one. We not only have a radical spritiual advisor that has yet to be put away by Obama, but always parallels with the 2004 race.

Your thoughts?

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, Primaries (all tags)

Permalink :: 36 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (2.00 / 3)

First, Dean should have never lost the election because of a scream. That is by far the dumbest reason ever. I honestly think he should've been our nominee.

Also, if any candidate in this race should've been put away by the media, it wouldn't be Obama for his pastor, but may be Clinton for her not winning a single race in February after Super Tuesday.

The longer Obama continues to lead, the more I believe that the American voter is simply moving beyond guilt by association.

_____________
changiness

by lizardbox on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:29:51 PM EST

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

I still think he lost because Iowans lost their nerve and didn't think he could win. They did the same thing many people are promoting now: support a candidate that seems more likely to win the election, and support him for that reason alone, even if he does not match up with your politics.

by ProgressiveDL on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:50:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

Your post epitomizes the problem with the Obama campaign. They are stuck in Feb. Feb appears to be his peak. Maybe he should get Springsteen to start singing "Glory Days" at his campaign stops. It seems that the campaign can't transition to another strategy.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:13:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wright is worse than the scream (2.00 / 2)

because there is so much more to talk about, and too much history between Obama and Wright to simply pass it off as a "scream".

We'll just have to see how it plays out. I don't think this enhances Obama's chances to convince the supers he can beat McCain.

by 4justice on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:32:38 PM EST

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (2.00 / 2)

Obama embracing Wright is emblematic of his lack of preparation for the run. If he were smart, he would have left Wright behind when he was elected to the Senate. Had he done that, it would have been close to a non-issue. Attending church with a loud mouth, misogynist bigot that tells race boggled bible stories would be a huge problem for a politician of either side. Being that Wright is a black preacher, it's not the same kind of push button issue for the left that it is for the Wright. If Obama is the nominee, this will be the same type of discussion as if he were a white minister pushing for re-segregation (or some such crap). Rememeber, the GOP only has to retrieve the votes of a slice of swing voters in swing states to beat us. Obama has already written off Florida and Michigan. I don't have any idea how he thinks he will win the general.

Dean scream was nothing that every worthwhile candidate hasn't done. It wasn't reflective of his values or his worldview. It revealed nothing about him. It was simply something that the media could manipulate to discredit him - that's all.

by Little Otter on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:42:19 PM EST

Oprah left the church (2.00 / 1)

Thought this was a rumor but no, Newsweek says Oprah was a smart businesswoman and could see this would hurt her popularity with mainstream audiences.

by catfish1 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:44:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oprah left the church (none / 0)

its ironic how the same people who want Oprah as Obama's VP nod like to conveniently forget this and still defend Obama

"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States

by DiamondJay on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:33:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What do you think about Pastor Doug Coe and HRC (none / 0)

embracing (in your words) him?

Here are some links on Coe and Clinton, this one, eg.

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:16:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dissimilar impact. (none / 0)

Politically speaking, Coe can't be used to deny her the presidency should she be the nominee in the same fashion that Wright can be used against Obama. Swing voters are likely to see Coe as a plus rather than a minus.

Mind you, I like Wright quite a bit. I think he's wrong about some important stuff, but as a local pastor, he's okay with me. However, someone running for president needs to have their affairs in order and not give the GOP a hammer to bash them over the head with. That's my beef with Obama on this - he has not shown proper regard for the Mighty Wurlitzer.

by Little Otter on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:00:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Response (none / 0)

"Politically speaking, Coe can't be used to deny her the presidency should she be the nominee in the same fashion that Wright can be used against Obama."

That's a Clinton-partisan take.

Nobody should be "denied" the presidency for the words of another person, especially when the candidate firmly opposes the offensive words.

The "Mighty Wurlitzer" aka RWNM is capable of using Coe just as effectively against HRC as they are of hammering Obama with Wright (by, say, adjusting the volume/frequency level of the noise a few notches up or down)... if we allow them to do so.

"Swing voters are likely to see Coe as a plus rather than a minus."

Why exactly would they see Coe as a plus?

"affairs in order and not give the GOP a hammer to bash them over the head with."

I do agree that Obama should've kept a greater distance at the get go from Wright than he did but he did handle the matter rather solidly thereafter (cases in point: 1. his phenomenal speech on it in PA 2. even after the barrage of Wrightboating, his polls numbers today from Gallup/Rasm have recovered) but there are a LOT of areas and associations where one can level that charge (of not getting affairs in order) at HRC. Where shall we begin?

Please see my comment here as well.

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:21:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Response (none / 0)

No, because Coe is to the right. You can't dissuade the center right from voting for a progressive because of a conservative relationship. You can dissuade the center right from voting for someone because of what they will perceive as a far-left relationship. Coe is a threat to Clinton in the primary but will be a non-issue in the general. All she has to do is trot out that James Baker attends church with this guy, and she's got a pass with the center right. In addition, there is no evidence of a deep, abiding and influential relationship between the two of them. The same cannot be said of Wright and Obama, because Obama himself has described the relationship in that fashion.

Clinton's affairs are in order. That simply means that she has ended the problematic relationships that she has - whatever they are - and everything else is demonstrably legal and above board. That doesn't mean the Wurlitzer isn't going to hammer away at pardons or whatnot. it simply means that issues are resolved and can be explained. There is an answer to the charges. Obama doesn't have that with Wright. He doesn't have it with Rezko either.

by Little Otter on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:33:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Coe's Nazi and Communist references (none / 0)

"Jesus says, `You have to put me before other people, and you have to put me before yourself.' Hitler, that was the demand of the Nazi Party. You have to put the Nazi Party and its objectives in front of your own life and ahead of other people!"

"I've seen pictures of young men in the Red Guard of China, a table laid out like a butcher table, they would bring in this young man's mother and father, lay her on the table with a basket on the end, he would take an axe and cut her head off."

"They have to put the purposes of the Red Guard ahead of the mother-father-brother-sister--their own life !"

"That was a covenant. A pledge. That was what Jesus said."
link

make him a weasel for both sides of the political spectrum and will turn off swing voters instead, I think.

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:41:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Also, (none / 0)

"Clinton's affairs are in order."
"He doesn't have it with Rezko either."

Bill Clinton taking $800K to pitch Columbia FTA while she postures as being anti-trade isn't exactly having affairs in order to give you a rel. mild example.

Or Clinton's Khazak Uranium deal-making drawing millions to his pres. library is a more serious example. Then there is Peter Paul's case which is brewing just in time for the GE. More money scandals in store for the Clinton.

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:48:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Also, (none / 0)

LOL - so are the big mining companies that are angry that the small mining company got the deal paying you to post on their behalf? Or do you just go all wobbly in the knees on behalf of big mining?

You do realize that Clinton's participation in that, and the donation to his library is both legal and ethical, right?

The people who are complaining about that are the ultra-right wing mining companies who are furious that they didn't get that bid.

by Little Otter on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:09:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The easily-charmed Obama scares me (2.00 / 2)

All evil, powerful men are charming. I am really nervous about Obama facing men like Achmenedijad, Putin. He could come away saying "well they liked ME. They succumbed to my powerful charming ways." Well, no Obama you just got played.

Obama supporters complain Wright is not a legitimate issue. Well guess what. Look past the nomination.
General Election voters will be concerned about this too. Still many voters do now know about Rev. Wright but the Republican attack ads will make sure they know about Wright, Rezko, Auichi, et al.

Even Oprah left Wright's church.

I'm concerned about the Supreme Court but I'm also very very concerned about national security and Obama does not inspire confidence.

by catfish1 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:42:24 PM EST

Re: The easily-charmed Obama scares me (none / 0)

You're not concerned about "Obliterating" other countries?

_____________
changiness

by lizardbox on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:32:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No. She says we have that capacity. (none / 0)

She is not rash.

by catfish1 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:29:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No. She says we have that capacity. (none / 0)

Yes, that's how foreign policy works.

_____________
changiness

by lizardbox on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:49:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The easily-charmed Obama scares me (none / 0)

And I believe Senator Obama showed with these words:
"Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama today called for a harder line against al Qaeda operatives hiding in tribal areas of Pakistan even at the risk of undercutting the American ally who leads the Muslim state.

The Illinois senator even threatened to use U.S. military force in those areas if Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf did not."

So he is comfortable using military force if that counrty does not do it our way. Hillary said she would retaliate in kind if an ally was attacked with nuclear weapons.

But only one is held accountable for her words. How typical of the Obama supporters. When he threatens military force, it's OK. She is a war monger. Give me a break.

by Jjc2008 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:09:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The easily-charmed Obama scares me (none / 0)

yes, he said that. Clinton criticized him for it, yet a similar attack was carried out without creating a rift with the Pakistani government. Besides, I don't see where exactly he threatened to "obliterate" anyone.

Lastly, Obama is talking about attacking those who killed American's on 9/11, Senator Clinton voted to attack a country that did not attack us on that day. So, please leave this issue be and if you are to speak compare apples to apples.

_____________
changiness

by lizardbox on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:48:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

The scream had nothing to do with Dean`s campaign being over. He finished third in the Iowa caucus with 18%, far behind Kerry 38% and Edwards 32%, after being the front leader in the weeks before the vote.

The difference for Obama is he actually did better in Pennsylvania, a state with good demographics for Clinton, than he did in Ohio before the Wright controversy happened.

by Gabbo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:55:31 PM EST

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

BO did better in PA. He lost by what 220,000 voters. What would you consider worse.

dvdi

by giusd on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:08:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

In Ohio, Clinton got 10,3% more vote than Obama. In Pennsylvania, a state with an older, less educated population and fewer black voters than Ohio, she got 9,2% more.

by Gabbo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:36:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

He did worse than he project. He projected only losing the state by 5 pts. and even said a few days before the election that it will be close.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:16:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

Does anyone here seriously think that Obama believes the govt invented AIDS to kill black people or any of the more outlandish beliefs that Wright has espoused? If not, what difference does it make that Obama attended his church, so long as he was able to discern for himself what elements of Wright's spiritual message (most of which were positive and grounded in reality, notwithstanding Wright's media portrayals) he should accept?

by DreamsOfABlueNation on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:02:20 PM EST

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

Of course I don't believe that. However, I do believe that Obama himself invented AIDS to kill black people.

_____________
changiness

by lizardbox on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:33:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

The problem is that Obama really hasn't defined himself therefore people are left to decide who Obama is based on Wright and other associations. Some people won't believe it, some people will and in others it will raise enough doubt in their mind that they can't pull the lever for him.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:18:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

"Some people will believe it"

That may be the case. I am asking if YOU believe it. If not, what business do you have falsely insinuating that Obama holds these crazy ideas. He is a member of our party and deserves better than to be undermined by fellow Democrats based on lies that "some people" might believe.

by DreamsOfABlueNation on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:36:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

You want the honest truth? I have no idea. I have no idea what Obama believes or thinks. You're whole argument is "he's a democrat therefore x" doesn't really work. That's kind of like saying Bush is a republican therefore he's x. Gosh, would most democrats send an anti gay gospel singer on a tour who was a Bush supporter in 2004? Didn't McClurkin even sing at the GOP convention? You have to judge people by their actions or their record. We have no record on Obama so we have to just look at his actions. The fact that he went to that church for 20 years tells me he didn't have too much of a problem with Wright's beliefs. He even dedicated a book to the guy so he must have at least agreed somewhat with Wright.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:49:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

OK, but if you are going to say that you have no idea that Obama believes that AIDS was invented by the govt to kill black people than you also need to concede that you can't be sure that Hillary doesn't believe that either. Both have been in politics about the same amount of time (Obama had 8 years in state politics) so they have just as long a record of acts and statements from which you can base your assessment on whether you think that they are batshit crazy. I tend to think not for both of them. I used to be quite religious, I'd go to chuch and hear my priest say all sorts of bad things about gays and abortion doctors and unwed couples and the like. I never believed what they said about these folks going to hell or living in sin or whatnot, but I did get something out of the spiritual experience notwithstanding some of my priest's backwards beliefs. I sense the same dynamic with Obama and Wright. Obama was willing to overlook some of his former pastor's more outlandish beliefs because he knew that they were rooted in a history of AA oppression and because he knew that there was a spiritually positive most of the pastors message (notwithstanding some of the more fiery language we see from his sermons in the media, which represent only a small component of his ministry).

And while we are on the subject of homosexuality, can we just be clear that despite Obama's associations with some intolerant characters like McLurkin he has articulated a policy on homosexuality that is more progressive than Hillary's. He is in favor of repealling DOMA completely on both the federal and state levels. Yet under Hillary's plan, states would be free to continue not to recognize gay marriages despite the fact that the Fed govt would be required to accord such recognition. In my book, it is more important what a person promises to do with the Presidency than the people that he or she associates with.

by DreamsOfABlueNation on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:08:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

Hillary did not go to Wright's church for 20 years. Hillary did not dedicate a book to Wright.

Obama won't tell us what he stands for. However, you are telling me that you believe that Obama is an adherent of black liberation theology on which all of Wright's beliefs are based.

If Obama wants to repeal DOMA then why did he pander to anti gay bigotry.

So it matters what he promises even though his actions don't back up those promises? Isn't that the ultimate in pandering?

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Sun May 04, 2008 at 08:58:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (2.00 / 1)

as much as I like Howard Dean's handling of the DNC minus the FL and MI problems, I don't think Dean would have won. That election was all about terrorism and security, and painting Dean as a puppet of moveon and Michael Moore would have been done a lot worse than it was to John Kerry. National security also was an issue I doubt Dean was stronger than Kerry on. Kerry was a veteran in Nam. However, the Kerry campaign should have been run more like Reagan 1980, not Clinton 1992, because security, gay marriage, and terror were the issues, not the economy, stupid. He didn't forcefully attack Bush's 9/11 "leadership" at all, he was too scared to do that. He was too cautious. Reagan made no bones about humiliating Carter about Iran Hostage, even running a commercial with a headline from NYT called "The Ayatollah Votes." Carter's humiliation still goes to this day. Not to mention, gay marriage was the issue a plurality of voters cited, and they over 80 percent went to Bush. Vermont was the first state to legalize it. Kerry also lost because he didn't listen to Bill Clinton when he told Kerry to come out in favor of state bans, and Kerry also voted against DOMA, which got over 80 votes. Dean would have had it much worse. Bush would have actually gotten that mandate he thought he had, and Dean would have been McGovern.

I do think he was more charismatic, and would have been a better running mate than Edwards, or even Gephardt would have been good. Kerry could have won if he had snapped back on Swift Vets and had been ready for it, and that could have been avoided if in the "Three Minutes" commercial, the line had been "just ask the men who served ON HIS BOAT" because they all approved of Kerry, not "just ask the men who served with him." Clinton word parsing works, Kerry could have learned from that.

"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States

by DiamondJay on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:05:32 PM EST

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

I dont see what the big deal is. I mean on MTP BO said that Rev Wright was not his mentor or adivser but just his pastor. Wow i guess that story is over. He barely knew Wright. They just sat on a committee together. Just friendly buds.

talk about fairtale.

david

by giusd on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:15:23 PM EST

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

Senators Clinton has been in the Senate for how many years? McCain? You know that they have shared the same chambers with an admitted KKK member? I think they should apologize, reject, denounce, rinse and repeat about this troubling association.

_____________
changiness

by lizardbox on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:34:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

And Obama should apologize, reject, denounce, rinse and repeat about this troubling association with openly gayhating extremists McGurkin or McClurkin or whatever.

When the Obama camp started playing the "she's nice to Mc Cain, therefore she must be a republican"; she had lunch with Murdoch, she must think like him, then the genie was out of the bottle.
A candidate will be in the company of many.

The same Obama supporters who condemn Hillary for having lunch with right wingers who fomented hate on the right, admire Barrack for saying he would talk to Ahmadinejad. This man called for the death of Jews, the obliteration of Israel but talking to him is a good thing by the Obama supporters standards. But talking to a right winger is evil.
I really don't get it when it comes to the neoliberals.

by Jjc2008 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:17:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Dean Scream Vs. Rev. Wright (none / 0)

Your attempts to re-make Wright into Obama's running mate are transparent and doomed to fail.

It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama

by Lefty Coaster on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:38:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

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.