Saturday, March 22, 2008

A Question for the Obama Campaign

I'd really like to know one thing: why has Sen. Barack Obama's campaign released to the press an old photo of his pastor, the highly controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright, with former President Bill Clinton at the White House during an annual prayer breakfast 10 years ago? What's the point here? Obama's camp appears to be acknowledging how damaging its candidate's relationship with Rev, Wright is and is trying to minimize the fallout by showing that the Clintons have sidled up to him too, as if that one-time encounter at a routine event somehow establishes the same kind of irresponsibility as Obama's 20 year intimate relationship with the firebrand preacher. But what's more troubling to me is this: isn't Obama supposed to be above this sort of tactic, which looks and smells like a smear? Isn't this the same type of dirty politics he's been decrying throughout the campaign? I'm sorry, but Obama wants to play it both ways, and that's a bit duplicitous.

There's something else I wanted to comment on. Listening to Air America Radio Friday evening a female caller was gushing about how Obama "has united this country in a very special way." As Bill Clinton would say, this is yet another myth about Obama. The 100% undeniable fact is that the Democratic Party is virtually split right down the middle, in half, between him and Hillary Clinton. Say what you want about Obama. He is extremely bright, charismatic, talented, dedicated, capable and has much integrity and a clear ability to inspire. Personally, I could easily support him should he be the nominee, and I think he'd make for a terrific president, as would Clinton (by the way, my support for Hillary is quite narrow over him; consider me at 51-49). But not only has Obama not united the entire country, he's far from uniting Democrats. I can admire, respect and appreciate the excitement that Obama brings to many (and I share that excitement on many levels), but let's be real. That excitement starts and stops with just 50% of Democrats. And as we know from the latest polls and trends, Republicans are not going to vote for him, and he's losing appreciable ground with independents. I really wish Democrats could just put aside their love for a second and be able to keep things in their proper political perspective.


Sidney Condorcet said...


You should check out politico where they have a really in-depth article about how Hillary has essentially no chance at all winning the nomination, yet the media still reports this as a two-person race. Furthermore, a Hillary advisor told the press that Hillary has, at best, a 10 percent chance at winning this thing. All your post reveals today is that Hillary, the new Huckabee, and her supporters, don't want to realize it's over and it's up to them, and not just Obama, to get over it and unite the party. It's not just Obama's responsibility to unite the party, it's also the responsibility of Clinton and people like you, Ostroy. The game's over and it's time we focus on McCain.

Anonymous said...

I just wanted to let you know that this loyal Democrat has taken you off of my favorite list. Hillary cant win the nomination without destroying the party.


Anonymous said...

Ostroy, why does it surprise you that Democrats are duplicitous? This is normal.

Here's one registered Democrat that's voting for the moderate John McCain.

Anonymous said...

Obama's been playing both sides of the card since the beginning,when ever someone brought the fact that if it wasn't for his race he would be where is ,his sergets holler racism,if someone brings up the fact he's getting 90% of the black vote,racism,I'm sorry but when your getting over 90% of the african american vote,against an aponent that has spent her intire political life working on equal rights and against racism,I'm sorry but you have to call it what it is,It's taken racism and turned it on it's head. the democratic party used to be about the working class of this country and equal rights for everyone,this party has even turned that on it's head,the caucas's that the party supports,makes it where the elite in the party make the choices for the rest of us.If you have the money and time to sit around for 3,4 0r more hours at a time you can have a voice,but if you have to work 2 jobs or more to make a living.your shit out of luck,If somehow you make it to a voting booth to make your voice heard,then like in texas,they have a caucus after the you voted and they turn your yes vote to a no vote.I truly beleive that hillary clinton needs to run as an independent once this nomination is takin from her,it may hurt the working man for 4 more years but it's time to stand up and make our voices heard

The Ostroy Report said...

Oy vey! It pains me to see, as I expected, Democrats tripping over themselves on the fast-track to defeat. Dems can't help themselves. They focus on everything except winning, which is why they've lost so many elections in the past 25 years.

First of all, you're right. Hillary cannot win the nomination. But neither can Obama. Neither of them will obtain the required minimum number of delegates. The difference netween me and you is that you've decided that Obama's delegate lead makes him the automatic, de facto nominee. Well, I hate to disappoint once again, but that's not how the party intended it to be when they instituted the super-delegate system. You can stick your head in the sand all you want, but behind closed doors, these party officials will decide this election based on who they think has the best chance of winning. So much has been made about "following the wishes of the electorate," but the fact is, Obama's small lead is anything but a mandate. The system of super-delegates is in place for a reason: to deal with a suituation EXACTLY like this one. I'm sorry, my friend, but it ain't over simply because you say it is.

As for who's truly dividing the party, I'd have to say it's anyone who wants to shut down our spirited, open, debate over Hillary/Obama...and/or those defecting to McCain.

Sidney Condorcet said...

Read the politico article Andy, you're being absolutely obtuse with your head in the sand. Yes, Obama won't get enough pledged delegates to secure the nomination, but there is no way superdelegates will overturn the will of the people and ostracize the most loyal constituency of the Democratic Party. Your candidate is just playing spoiler. What's with politicians from Arkansas? Hillary's the new huckabee, and everyday she stays in the race she becomes more irrelevant. Most of the superdelegates in Hillary's camp signed up over a year ago. All the superdelegate momentum is with Obama. In fact, nearly the entire narrative of the presidential race has been "The Testing of Obama". It's clear that history is propelling him forward. The game is over, the lights are on, the music has stopped. Wake up to reality, Andy, and help unite the party instead of persistently trying to drive a wedge between democrats. The longer she stays in the race the more she risks irrelevancy within the party after Obama is sworn in as our 44th President.

Anonymous said...

the reason your being sent to the politico artical by sidney,is this site right-a-long with buzz flash(who claims they haven't indorsed anyone) print anything and everything that make Obama the second coming of christ.While at the same time print anything they can find rotten about hillary,even the storys they print from others,they title them anti clinton,and if you read alot of the things on them,you will notice,a lot of them say what sidney is saying here word for word just under a different blogger name

Anonymous said...

Andy, you rank right up there with Fox News as two media outlets who won't let this one go.

Is Barack perfect? No. Is he a refreshing new perspective to the American political scene? Yes. If you want to find fault with him, you won't have to look far. If you keep shrilling it's because the race isn't over, then you aren't being very realistic. Bet you had Portland State in the office pool, too.

As said before, she, and the superdelegates are a good safety valve if something serious happens between now and then. But please try to stop creating that situation. Give it a rest, Andy.

Anonymous said...

Actually Andy, it's you who are being duplicitous here. One minute you dismiss the superdelegate Richardson endorsement as nothing to talk about. Then you flip and (correctly) talk about how it's now all in the hands of the superdelegates. Remind us all again of the RECENT Clinton superdelegate endorsements? I recall reading that Clinton has picked up about 5, Obama has picked up over 30 in the last 3 weeks. Sidney is right. Her majors all came out for her long, long ago and some of them are stripping off to Obama. I don't believe any Obama supers have stripped off to Clinton. These are significant statistics.

Equally duplicitous of you is your McCain-esque tactic of saying "Obama said he would do X now he's doing Y" and making that a big deal about it. You who wants us all to keep the "spirited Hill v O" debate open but apparently oppose Obama's right to campaign however he damn well pleases. And does this Wright picture REALLY look and smell like a smear? Hardly. Are you suggesting this is a Photoshop fake? It doesn't look all tinted, dark and ominous. You fail to convince in this matter about Wright. Camp Clinton pushes Wright crap to the superdelegates but for you it's absolutely unforgivable that Obama would point out the hypocrisy that the Clintons were well aware of and playing nice with him too. It's called "keeping people honest" Andy and its not something that is for anyone's exclusive use. AND BESIDES, why are you continuing to peddle and suck up to this wingnut topic? Where is your analysis of the controversial things countless WHITE PREACHERS have said? WHITE PREACHERS spitting fire and brimstone and blaming Americans for 9/11 in the pulpit and then going to the White House for a prayer meeting with Bush or Reagan? Seriously. What is with you? In case you haven't noticed, this crap of yours has been nourishing the wingnut trolls here in your comments. Maybe I've missed something over time and you really agree with them.

Explain this to me:
"Democrats tripping over themselves on the fast-track to defeat. Dems can't help themselves. They focus on everything except winning, which is why they've lost so many elections in the past 25 years."

How is it the suggestion (with only 7 months until the general election) that everyone unites behind the Democratic frontrunner and focuses on battling the GOP instead of ourselves is "the fast-track to defeat"? I thought we lost so many elections over the last 25 years because we demonstrated no backbone, tried to be more Republican, didn't call bullshit on Iran-Contra and Swift Boating and voter suppression?

And as Hillary continues to cozy up to McCain, we would all do well to remember that every time the Democrats put up a candidate that tries to be as Republican as the Republican, the Republican always wins.

Anonymous said...

the great thing of Obama's people trying to get hillary to drop out has been there from the beginning.they help the right-wing demonize the Clintons even before Obama publicly ran for office.90% of the Obama people have used and I will repeat USED FOX NEWS talking points to downgrade the former first-lady. Now these same people give you,she needs to get out of the race because she ripping the party people started tearing the party up when you brought your race baiting tacktics about,there's still a few skeletons in obama's closet that haven't been exsposed yet. THANK GOD HILLARY IS STILL THERE TO PICK UP THE PEICES

Anonymous said...

I love how Ostroy will go down with the ship declaring Obama can't win without the proper number of delegates, yet in 2000 he was crying that Gore's popular vote meant he should have won the Presidency.

Seems a little duplicitous to me....

Congratulations on a post without a reference to someone's skin color. You're really starting to do a good job at hiding your racist beliefs.

Anonymous said...

Andy, my man. Time to move on. Hillary cannot win the nomination and as a practical matter the 2025 delegates needed to "win" the nomination is no longer the number to watch. In reality, if the superdelegates flip the nomination to Hillary after Obama wins the most pledged delegates, states, and popular vote (and w/o a re-vote in Mich or Fla, she cannot win the popular vote), start getting comfortable with the phrase "President McCain." Most Obama supporters and a number of intellectually honest Hillary supporters (you included) will recognize the injustice for what it is. It may not be consistent with the "rules" since he won't have 2025 delegates, but that won't matter.

Obama has run a pretty efficient and successful campaign (did I mention there won't be a re-vote in Fla and Mich yet no blood on Obama's hands - well done). Hillary on the other hand is low on funds, has a different message every week and presides over a campaign with so much internal strife that a general election campaign, or Hillary administration may not be something to look forward to.

Independants and Republicans I know all say the same thing. No chance they vote for Hillary, but they seem to like Obama. May not be a scientific poll, but I think it's the rule, not the exception. Independent thinking Americans are more likely to look seriously at Obama because he doesn't have the baggage of the Clintons. Again, that may not seem fair, but it seems to be real.

Time for Hillary to step aside for the sake of the party and accept a role as a strong Cabinet Secretary in an Obama administration.

Anonymous said...

The Richardson endorsement may mean little to Main St. America, but its significance, of course, is with the superdelgates. That's all Hill's got now and they haven't been lining up to endorse her for quite some time. Seems like they are waiting for it to be OK to endorse Obama without ticking off the Clintons.

It's not a tie, it's not a mandate, but it's not going to be Hillary in the end, either.

Comment on your post on Cheney - he is not Dr. Evil from Austin Powers. He strikes me as a meaner version of Mr. Potter from It's a Wonderful Life. "So?"

Anonymous said...

Obama has not only split the Democratic Party in half he has caused a huge rift between whties and blacks all over the country. He is not a uniter nor can he develop into one. The cat is out of the bag. Democratic whites have gone along merrily working and planning for the advancement of whites as well as blacks who have been harmed by this administration. White people thought we were all in the same boat and had a common cause - we thought we were united. But all this time the black people were feigning aggreeableness and appearing to like us. A black minister on Fox said that the churches and blacks don't like white peole in general but can like them as individuals.

I asked a co-worker/friend why blacks didn't come to white churches and asked her to come to mine. She laught\ed and said "We don't like your music." I could live with that. Now everything has changed. White people are in a state of shock -- even white anchors mention reacting like they'd had a blow to the stomach when they heard Wright. And, I tell you, things have changed between us in the town where I live.

Obama cannot win the presidency. He may be the Dem's nominee but he will not survive the airing of Wright's sermons by the Republicans and the assault of their campaign against him. And, he will lose a large number of white Democrats who are having a hard time dealing with the knowledge of the width and depth of the black population's hate for all white people. Has anybody heard "average blacks" on TV saying otherhwise. No one is making amends -- not even Obama.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous posts. Blecch. No consistent "name" to be held accountable to for your words, and yet you feel free to repeatedly attack those who identify their posts. How courageous of you. Probably also another tired chickenhawk warmonger who's never served in the military.

Regardless, Anon 12:40 appears to have completely missed my point, which is that it is the wingnuts who continue to hammer the "black anti-American preacher" theme while completely failing to chastise the Pat Robertsons of the world. But of course my pointing that out makes ME the racist here. Riiiiight. Standard wingnut hypocrisy at its best and the Anon 12:40s their blind cheerleaders.

And then we have Anon 2:37 completely missing the boat and obviously never having read or listened to a word Obama has said or studied the things he has done in his legislative career. Your ignorance is your own fault. Obama is a solid candidate and he is in first place with votes from Democrats, Republicans and Independents ranging across all spectra of age/race/gender/class. Obama is in first place even despite all the votes cast for Clinton by Limbaugh's Lemmings.

Anon 2:37, it's not surprising that things have changed in your town since the wingnuts decided to make Obama answerable for Wright, Farrakhan and any other black person who has had the temerity to say that things are still not OK as regards race in America. To put the shoe on the other foot, why is it OK that McCain hasn't been as vociferously held accountable for Hagee or Robertson, who have espoused equally reprehensible anti-American, anti-Semitic rhetoric? Things have changed in your town because the discussion is on the surface again instead of being ignored and it's a hard discussion to have. Obama reached out to all races in America in the speech he gave (although with a slight jab in the ribs to Palestinians). Again, your missing that is your own fault, not his.

Anonymous said...

Try to understand this, bkln. Hague and Robertson are not McCain's spiritual advisor or best friend, nor have I heard either of them say God Damn America or condemned all white people for any condition. There is a tremendous difference. McCain doesn't go to their chuches; they are not McCain's best friends or spiritual advisor etc. etc. etc. This has been pointed out ad naseum but poeple like you are ignoring it and are going to doom us to a McCain victory because you will elect Obama as our nominee.

Anonymous said...

I walked out of my church during the sermon when the preacher said humans have dominion over animals; that PETA was a misguided organization and we should ignore such organizations and do what we want to do with animals. That was reprehensible to me, and also not scriptually correct. I found another church. No excuse for Obama, although this preacher was not my spiritual advisor. Had he been I would have found another.

Anonymous said...

bkln,I know it's hard for anything to get threw your thick skull,but we'll try 1 more time,john mccain did not, repeat did not,did not did not set in the pew and listen to pat robertson week after week for 20 years in church listening to that hate preached from the alter,I know you can't understand the difference,to most people it's a big deal,but I wouldn't vote mccain either

Anonymous said...

It's all over but the shouting. Obama is the Democratic nominee!


Anonymous said...

Dear Junior,

I sure hope McCain doesn't start the draft to fight his hundred year war; but, if he does I pray you are 4-F or an old man or woman.


A mother.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mother,

Don't worry. There will never be a McCain. It will be Pres. Obama.



35th 'n Shields said...

You said:
"Oy vey! It pains me to see, as I expected, Democrats tripping over themselves on the fast-track to defeat. Dems can't help themselves. They focus on everything except winning, which is why they've lost so many elections in the past 25 years"

I say:
You are a big part of the problem. I urge you to become a part of the solution. You continue to stoke the flames of division. Tone down your rhetoric.

Also, how do I get off your damned email update list?

Anonymous said...

"Hillary has the experience needed to run the White House. She has shown exceptional skills managing her campaign AND HAS EVEN BEEN SHOT AT BY SNIPERS IN THE BATTLE FIELD."

Ha ha.
Ha ha ha ha ha.