The Media's Creation Unravels: Why Obama Should Drop Out

Sen Obama should drop out of the race. Having just seen the new attack ad that the GOP is showing in NC -- condemning the state's Democratic leadership for backing Obama, replete with Rev Wright cursing America -- it is clear that Senator Obama is detrimental to the Democratic brand nationwide. As Jerome Armstrong wrote nearly one month ago, "That's fall-out from Wright, not against just Obama, but also Clinton, and most likely against the Democratic Party in general. It's branding of Democrats Obama, and Clinton, as anti-American."

Obama earned his lead early on, prior to being vetted. After he lost Texas and Ohio, the Wright videos appeared, shocking the nation. Slowly, information about his relationship to Rezko, and his affiliation with William Ayers have also entered the mainstream.

CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE READING 

Tags: a complete waste of electrons, ABC News, Barack Obama, Bill Kristol, Charlie Gibson, clinton rules, delusional rant, diary pimping, Freeper propaganda, George Stephanopoulos, Hillary Clinton, hit diary, Media, Media Bias, misogyny, Mistaken for snark, New Yorker, Obama Derangement Syndrone, Obamedia, right-wing smear attacks, sexism, superdelegates, Talking Points Memo, This Week, Troll Diary, whiff of despair (all tags)

Comments

57 Comments

Where's your snark tag?

No, really. Where's your snark tag?

by lizardbox 2008-04-24 07:44PM | 0 recs
No shortage of Chicken-Littles on this site.

Hillary supporters underestimate the intelligence of American voters.

by dystopianfuturetoday 2008-04-24 07:50PM | 0 recs
Re: No shortage of Chicken-Littles on this site.

Nothing says high IQ like a bunch of Obama supporters sitting around laughing about what a fucking whore Hillary Clinton is.

Uh huh. Right.

by Little Otter 2008-04-24 08:04PM | 0 recs
Re: No shortage of Chicken-Littles on this site.

Yeah, uhm where does that happen?

by Drewid 2008-04-24 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: No shortage of Chicken-Littles on this site.

No one here used that nasty term and I never would.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-24 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: No shortage of Chicken-Littles on this site.

Yeah, thats a little over the top.  Think about what you just said then reverse the rolls.

by reggie23 2008-04-24 08:22PM | 0 recs
I can't stand Randi Rhodes and would never...

... call Hillary a whore.  I've got plenty of substantial gripes with her.

by dystopianfuturetoday 2008-04-24 09:25PM | 0 recs
by Obama Independent 2008-04-24 07:44PM | 0 recs
The Obama campaign's smugness...

...from the candidate on down to his supporters (including those in this blog), is what will torpedo his campaign, either before or after the Convention.

Obamaphiles just aren't getting it.  

by bobswern 2008-04-24 08:08PM | 0 recs
Re: The Obama campaign's smugness...

Excellent point.  

by BPK80 2008-04-24 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: The Obama campaign's smugness...

Yes because calling people Obamaphiles certainly shows the high mindedness.

by Obama Independent 2008-04-24 08:29PM | 0 recs
Smugness?

Let me get this straight.  A freshman Senator, virtually unknown on the national level, out-smarts, out-hustles and out-thinks the "inevitable" candidate who sough not a fight, but a coronation, is smug?

by UrbanRedneck 2008-04-24 09:01PM | 0 recs
Did you see Tweety tonight?

Wright is about to be wrong again tomorrow night on Moyer's.

Bye bye BO!

by CoyoteCreek 2008-04-24 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Did you see Tweety tonight?

I remember reading here when the Wright issue broke that Obama would lose PA by 20 points or more.  Clinton couldn't break double digits.

Sure, the PA vote wasn't good for Obama, but it sure wasn't a tragedy for him and it didn't help Clinton much.  

So far this week Obama is +3 in superdelegates, Clinton is +1.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-24 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Did you see Tweety tonight?

Obama lost 60 of 67 counties, and lost by 10 points. Not very impressive considering he outspent Hillary by millions.

by JFK464 2008-04-24 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Did you see Tweety tonight?

Rendell won only 3 more counties to win the Governorship.

And, yes, it wasn't impressive for Obama. But it also wasn't a tragedy for him and it wasn't impressive for Clinton either.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-24 07:54PM | 0 recs
erm

this was a primary. Primary historically have much lower turn out then GE elections.

by kindthoughts 2008-04-24 09:03PM | 0 recs
Re: erm

I'm sure that was their point.

by map 2008-04-24 10:37PM | 0 recs
ok, I completely zoned out on that.

by kindthoughts 2008-04-25 12:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Did you see Tweety tonight?

BTW, the margin wasn't 10 pts. It was 9.1 which is ordinarily rounded to 9.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-24 08:11PM | 0 recs
Hillary supporters didn't major in math.

They majored in miracles.

by Elsinora 2008-04-24 09:14PM | 0 recs
erm...they keep hoping...

which is confusing because they said hope is overrated.

by kindthoughts 2008-04-24 09:41PM | 0 recs
Against...did you see Tweety tonight?

You consider the "Wright issue" a moment in time, but it continues and tomorrow night gas will be poured on that smouldering fire once again.

Did you know that Obama is just saying what he has to say because he's a politician?  His mentor, spiritual advisor and "kindly old uncle" says so.

Not a pretty sight to see something shot down from the sky - in flames.

by CoyoteCreek 2008-04-24 07:55PM | 0 recs
You're ignoring the issue. Wright = Obama

Clinton is not involved in this travesty, no matter how much you wish it were so.

by CoyoteCreek 2008-04-24 08:04PM | 0 recs
You're still ignoring the issue. Wright = Obama

Don't try and change the subject.  FACE FACTS.

by CoyoteCreek 2008-04-24 08:12PM | 0 recs
Re: You're still ignoring the issue. Wright = Oba

Just because Tweety deliberately clipped off the part before the "politician" line doesn't mean his context is worthwhile. Wright was talking about the media playing the soundbites over and over and that Obama politically had to distance himself from them. The question Moyers asked was whether or not Wright felt hurt by the Philly speech distancing Obama from Wright's remarks. Wright said that any politician would be forced to distance himself from those televised snippets.  That's what any politician would do. When asked if Obama has ever echoes or agreed with those snippets, Wright emphatically said no. So once again the media goes into a tizzy misreading Rev. Wright. Now we'll hear CONCERN that other uneducated voters might not figure this out.

by elrod 2008-04-24 09:54PM | 0 recs
Why yes. The winner should drop out. Of course.

How about Sen. Clinton drop out and start to unite the party so we can win this thing. Nah. That would be too simple.

by Travis Stark 2008-04-24 07:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Why yes.

I would never support Hillary dropping out. This party is no longer worth the bottom of my shoe--end of discussion.

by zcflint05 2008-04-24 07:47PM | 0 recs
How about Obama's supporters stop acting...

...like they've won this, already. They haven't, no matter how much they might rant to the contrary.

And, in so doing, your smugness is undermining any chance Obama would have even if he does make it to the general election.

You Obamaphiles just aren't getting it.

Could you be more disaffecting of the other half of the party?

And, you, are one of the very worst offenders, IMHO!

by bobswern 2008-04-24 08:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary as Huckabee

hillary supporters just aren't geting it. Get over your inferiority complex and grow a pair. We are NOT afraid of the Repugs! McBush is the weakest candidate the they have had in a long time and has MANY skeltons in his own closet. And stop living in the past, and start living for a better future.

by venician 2008-04-24 08:24PM | 0 recs
It's Obamaphiles that have this problem.

Hillary's supporters don't have an inferiority complex, at all. They've been humbled, certainly. But, there's an overriding sense of equality being demanded by Hillary's campaign. To counter that, we have the elitism and smugness of the Obama candidacy to contend with...and contend with it we are. This goes for obnoxious posters such as yourself, just as much as anyone!

by bobswern 2008-04-24 08:35PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Obamaphiles that have this problem.

You keep using the right wing elitism mud pie, but it really just keeps making you look like you have some sort of inferiority complex. It's a joke that you could compare the 100 million dollar women to Obama, and arrive at the conclusion that Obama belong to the elite class.

by venician 2008-04-24 08:42PM | 0 recs
Not elitism, or smugness. Reality.

There comes a time for a candidate to admit defeat and work for the greater good, and we are well past that point. In all likelihood it looks like we'll waste the next month and a half and another $100 million dollars playing this out to its inevitable conclusion, but hopefully at that time we can come together to work to get Sen. Obama elected.

It is reality that some Hillary supporters will never be able to get on board, and that's regrettable, but to think that's half of them is laughable. I give Hillary supporters more credit than that.

I disagree with another poster here who thinks John McCain is going to be a pushover. I've been paying attention to him of late, and his rhetoric will be very persuading to a lot of people. Every day we are not focusing on him our chances of winning in November diminish.

by Travis Stark 2008-04-25 03:44AM | 0 recs
Re: The Media's Creation Unravels: Why Obama Shoul

As if Hillary doesn't have tons that will be used against her -- that Obama hasn't brought up

by politicsmatters 2008-04-24 07:46PM | 0 recs
Re: The Media's Creation Unravels: Why Obama Shoul

You know, Michelle Malkin had a wonderfully fair and balanced look on which terrorist groups support which Presidential candidates; interestingly enough, the Republicans seem to tie the Weatherman Underground with the Clintons, too. Go figure.

Of course, that's nonwithstanding your claim Senator Obama has no merits, the media created him, his supporters are idiots, and that we should let the GOP decide our candidate by proxy. I think they're making these ads because they are scared Obama will be the nominee, and are doing whatever they can to ensure he will not.

I suppose it doesn't matter to you Clinton was more than happy to perpetuate the Wright thing when it suited her politically. That was okay, though, I suppose, eh?

Overall, though, I think this is what your post is abetting:

by ragekage 2008-04-24 07:47PM | 0 recs
Re: The Media's Creation Unravels: Why Obama Shoul

Well, for what it's worth, at least McCain isn't telling us that the only way to end racism is by voting for him and we all become magically united in a glorious post racial society...

by zcflint05 2008-04-24 07:48PM | 0 recs
Neither is Obama. nt.

by MBNYC 2008-04-24 07:53PM | 0 recs
Re: The Media's Creation Unravels: Why Obama Shoul

Good point; I've yet to hear a candidate say that this season.

by ragekage 2008-04-24 07:54PM | 0 recs
If Obama has his way, he won't say much...

...more, either!

The smugness carries through via his unwillingness to debate Hillary now, as well.

Noone's won this thing; and according to political common sense the guy should be debating her for his own well-being.

Then again, this all goes hand-in-hand with the general sentiment that somehow Obama's earned the right to the nomination.

Get over it! He has NOT earned that right (yet, anyway).

And, if he expects to earn the right to represent the entire party, he damn well better continue debating about the issues that matter.

And, last I checked, racial divisiveness in our society wasn't even in the top-10 of voters' concerns this year.

His smugness, along with the same mentality from many of his supporters, is going to seal his fate.

He will reap what he's sowing.

by bobswern 2008-04-24 08:17PM | 0 recs
Re: If Obama has his way, he won't say much...

I noted Obama had never said anything, and you went into a completely unrelated tirade...

/Confused

by ragekage 2008-04-24 08:32PM | 0 recs
Glib graphics, smug and snarky remarks...

...do not a convincing argument make.

For that matter, they're just offensive...but only in a sophomoric manner. Again, too much time on your hands this evening, I see.

by bobswern 2008-04-25 12:13AM | 0 recs
Re: If Obama has his way, he won't say much...

Get over yourself.  Hillary ducked debates in this very primary when she was the frontrunner.  That's what frontrunners do.

And didn't you get the memo?  The tide has turned and Hillary is flying!  You can drop the 'smug' and 'elitist' talking points now.  

by map 2008-04-24 10:45PM | 0 recs
Hillary hasn't ducked debates.

Support your comment, please. (Preferably with something published in 2008!)

Thank you.

by bobswern 2008-04-25 12:08AM | 0 recs
Re: The Media's Creation Unravels: Why Obama Shoul

And her hometown paper is on the Weatherman beat, too.  Note that the article also addresses the Rich pardon.

http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/lo ngisland/politics/blog/2008/04/brinks_ra dical_hill_quiet_whil.html

As we noted earlier, Hillary Clinton's sudden deep concern with Barack Obama' acquaintance with former radical Weatherman Bill Ayers in Chicago has raised anew questions about Hillary's involvement with and ties to her husband's grant of clemency in 2001 to two convicted Weathermen, Susan Rosenberg and Linda Sue Evans.

On a conference call this morning, her press secretary Howard Wolfson was asked what she thought about her husband commuting the sentences of those two. He said he didn't know, and he didn't think she had ever been asked. He was wrong.

In 2001, Newsday asked Wolfson himself what Hillary -- New York's new senator at the time -- thought about the pardons of financier Marc Rich and Rosenberg, who had been convicted on explosives charges and linked to the 1981 Brinks robbery in which a couple of NY cops were killed.

Mary Jo White, the US Attorney at the time, was furious about both pardons, as were many in law enforcement. And New York's other senator was more vocal. Sen. Chuck Schumer told the NY Times on Jan. 21 that he was "surprised" by the commutation "with the families of the officers killed still grieving. This is a clear injustice."

Hillary? "She thinks that it was a pardon made by the president," was the only comment Wolfson would offer -- no judgment on the merits, no expression of disapproval. (Story after the jump.)

So, to summarize: The Clinton campaign thinks there are unanswered questions about Obama and Ayers. Then, maybe there are also a few about why the senator who was supposed to be representing New Yorkers was unwilling to speak out about commuting the 58 year sentence of a woman who had been linked to a crime in which New York cops were killed, while her fellow senator and the chief federal prosecutor spoke out.

Is she soft on 1960s radical terror? If questions about Ayers and Obama are fair game because the Republicans might use them, then -- shouldn't she be called on to defend or denounce all of her husband's pardons now, because the Republicans might use them?"

by politicsmatters 2008-04-24 07:52PM | 0 recs
Marc Rich

Why there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that the GOP would use these scurrilous attacks against Hillary!

by highgrade 2008-04-24 08:42PM | 0 recs
Oooooh!

If it's on No Quarter, it must be right.

Or rightwing. Whatever.

by MBNYC 2008-04-24 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Oooooh!

You know, this almost reads like a Universal diary, only lite on content.

by Drewid 2008-04-24 08:08PM | 0 recs
Not smug enough

or self-pitying, fatuously deluded, know-it-all enough to be a universal diary, I'm afraid.

Plus, no freeper videos.

:-)

by MBNYC 2008-04-24 08:24PM | 0 recs
Nobody is dropping out

We will sort it out at the convention, if not before. Relax. You know, not that long ago, party conventions pretty much always had floor fights. And yet, the party still managed to survive.

by itsthemedia 2008-04-24 08:48PM | 0 recs
The tide would only matter...

...if the ship hadn't already sailed.

by Elsinora 2008-04-24 09:25PM | 0 recs
Hilarious

This is pure comedy. The sense of entitlement among Hillary supporters is staggering. She was supposed to be crowned the nominee. And then she blew it by blowing off half of America.

by elrod 2008-04-24 09:58PM | 0 recs
Re: The Media's Creation Unravels: Why Obama

Thank you for highlighting that Jerome Armstrong wrote nearly one month ago, "That's fall-out from Wright, not against just Obama, but also Clinton, and most likely against the Democratic Party in general. It's branding of Democrats Obama, and Clinton, as anti-American."

I missed it when he wrote that but it is the final bit of information that has enabled me to decide what I think of Jerome Armstrong's character and quality of analysis.

by My Ob 2008-04-24 10:55PM | 0 recs
Moyers and Gergen beg to differ...

...tonight on CNN...much talk about the timing of Jeremiah Wright now responding.

Gergen, IMHO the most credible pundit on tv today, stated, flat out, 'This is the very worst possible timing for Obama, in terms of Wright responding now.'

by bobswern 2008-04-25 12:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Moyers and Gergen beg to differ...

I did not see the discussion, but from your snippet you posted you are correct, Gergen sure is disagreeing with Jerome Armstrong.

From the snippet you posted Gergen is saying that Wright damages Obama - nothing about Wright damaging Clinton and the Democratic Party as a whole. Heck, the snippet  does not even say that the specific damage to Obama is that it brands him as anti-American.

by My Ob 2008-04-25 01:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Moyers and Gergen beg to differ...

O.K. I have now read the rush transcript of the discussion.

As far as I can see Gergen did NOT say Wright was damaging Clinton and the Democratic Party as a whole.

Somebody did say "I think that's very troubling, or should be for the Democratic Party".

That person was Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council. I let the audience decide how to call his character and political insight.

by My Ob 2008-04-25 02:44AM | 0 recs
Re: The Media's Creation Unravels: Why Obama Shoul

agreed! it is actually already in mainstream and rebranding of Democrats happened if and as soon as they will nominate Obama. Damage will be for many years.

by engels 2008-04-24 10:55PM | 0 recs
why the hell did you troll rate this comment:

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/4/25/0 3918/2752/7#7

by kindthoughts 2008-04-25 12:19AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads