Monday, April 07, 2008

Bill Kristol Gives a Glimpse Into the Repubs' Strategy for November

Make no mistake: heading towards the general election in November, the Republican Party smells intense fear, and that fear will manifest itself into the dirtiest, ugliest, most divisive presidential election campaign in American history. The GOP's coming off of eight miserable, economically ravished, war-torn, scandal-plagued years of Bush/Cheney. Given the likelihood that Sen. Barack Obama--with his message of inspiration, hope and change--will eventually prevail in his protracted primary battle with Sen. Hillary Clinton, the reality is settling in that the junior Senator from Illinois could be the next occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania. Just ask neocon pundit William Kristol.

In his op-ed piece in Monday's NY Times, the rabid right-winger confides that in private meetings with leading conservatives there's a growing belief that Obama's gonna beat their presumptive nominee, Sen. John McCain. And he suggests that, at least in some Repug circles, the smear campaigns are already being developed. Kristol writes: Last week over drinks, one Republican strategist not affiliated with the McCain campaign mused about how an independent advertising effort against Obama might work. "Barack Obama: He's not who you think he is" would be the theme. The supporting evidence would come from his left-wing voting record in Illinois and Washington, spiced up with fun video clips of Rev. Wright.

"Fun clips of Rev Wright?" You bet your ass they're gonna run like mad with this stuff. I've been saying that for weeks now. Remember how they vilified John Kerry over his windsurfing photo? Can you imagine what these vicious thugs are going to do with those "God Damn America" clips from the Reverend? Obama's not gonna know what hit him.

Kristol goes on to quote a Democratic operative: "Finally I think McCain's going to win. Obama isn't growing in stature. Once I thought he could be Jimmy Carter, but now he reminds me more of Michael Dukakis with the flag lapel thing and defending Rev. Wright. Plus he doesn't have a clue how to talk to the middle class..." And that's a Democrat speaking.

So there you have it: Obama's an unpatriotic, raging liberal elitist whose preacher hates America. And we haven't even thrown in his past drug use; his wife's comments about America; or his "terrifying" middle name or "Muslim heritage." Just wait. This party's only getting started. If Kristol is right about one thing, it's that the Republican attack machine is quite busy greasing its venomous gears as we speak. The question for Democrats is this: Can Obama face down this onslaught and come out victorious?

On another note, we could use your help at The The Adrienne Shelly Foundation. We are a tax-exempt, non-profit organization dedicated in my wife's honor to help carry out her spirit and passion, with the goal of assisting women filmmakers. Adrienne was brutally killed in NYC on November 1, 2006. Through the Foundation, her commitment to filmmaking lives on. We've established scholarships, grants, finishing funds and living stipends at NYU's Tisch School of the Arts/Kanbar Institute of Film; Columbia University; American Film Institute; Women in Film; the Independent Feature Project; the Nantucket Film Festival; and the Sundance Institute. We're very pleased to announce that one of last year's grant recipients, Cynthia Wade, just won an Oscar for Best Documentary Short Subject for "Freeheld." We are proud of Cynthia and to have supported this film. Your generous contribution will go a long way towards helping us continue to achieve our very important mission.
Thank you.


Anonymous said...

"The question for Democrats is this: Can Obama face down this onslaught and come out victorious?"

The real operative question is not whether Obama can face down this onslaught and come out victorious, it's whether the American people can face down this cynical strategy and whether, in a loud, monolithic voice, the better angels of our nature scream to the Heavens, "ENOUGH!! OUR TIME IS NOW!!"

Obama's candidacy raises a litany of questions about America herself that need to be answered emphatically.

Anonymous said...


Give it up. She ain't gonna win no matter how hard you try.

Prius said...

I don't know how many times I've told friends what is happening with this election. What is happening is that the media is against Hillary and for Barack. I don't care who you watch or listen to (except Andy), but the newspapers are against her, the radio and TV stations (networks) can not miss a day where they are blasting her for "something". The magazines are constantly running stories against Hillary and pro Obama, yet Hillary is right in this race.

Everyone is asking Hillary to drop out, to which I and the Clinton's say, "Drop dead." The reason they want her to drop out is two fold, one for the DNC and Dean in particular to get out of the mess they (he) caused with Florida and Michigan. This would take the monkey off their backs. Second, it would make Obama the candidate in November. This is my friends, a SET UP, we are being set up for defeat in November by the Republicans, AGAIN! They are going for the trifecta and if we think they are not, we will see in November what the third defeat will be like.

The Republicans want Obama in the worst way because they know Hillary will kick their asses in November. The GOP have dirt on Barack and are just waiting for the minute he is the pick of the party. As soon as he is the candidate the gloves come off and he and the party will not know what hit them. Hillary's past has been reviewed and re-reviewed, no surprises here, but Obama is unknown and a sitting duck. Once Obama is the candidate, it will be too late for our party once the dirt comes and believe me it WILL come and what they have on him is going to be huge. Remember my words, "It's a SET UP."

Anonymous said...

Sigh, these dirty tactics just leave me exhausted. I think I'll go with what Bill Clinton says that if there are two candidates and one is offering hope and the other fear, go with hope. That and Obama says never fear, he came up in Chicago politics and knows to to deal with dirty fighting.

Anonymous said...

As a Baby Boomer who has been in politics for years. I have been saying for months that Obama can't get elected in November. We are being set up and many naive Obama supporters are going to get the lesson of their lives. Red states are not going to vote for Obama in November. They are just messing with us. But Obama supporters don't have a clue as to how the political game is played. (It's state by state, not popular vote.)
I REALLY hate to say this, but when it comes down to it, many white men will not vote for Obama. All the racists are not dead yet. They view this as their last stand for white power. I have written many progressive talk shows who are pushing Obama and doing nothing but Hillary hate speech. I tell them the same thing, but they never respond. They never take the subject up.
Not only that, these hate talkers are only hurting & turning off the Democratic base. And who is the Democratic base? WOMEN!!!!!!!!!!

Many women have told me just how pissed off they are at the progressive talk shows, the pro Obama press, and the naive Obama supporters. Will they vote for McCain? NO! But many have said they won't vote for president. As a political junkie, I know that is a vote for McCain.
I blame a lot of the progressive talk show hosts for this whole mess.
(One host has called Hillary a whore!)
Either Obama and Clinton should run together or else we need someone else. (Edwards or Gore would be great).
There are not enough young voters to overcome the white male vote and the pissed off female vote.
More than anything we need a Dem in the White House. But what have we done?????????

Anonymous said...

And just think the republicans can't be called SWIFT-BOATING because in order to be swiftboating it has to be not the whole truth.Rev. Wright is a gift from god to the republican 527 groups,and the whole time John Mccain can stay above the fray.527 groups can not be in cohoots(with) a canidate,but they can dam-sure work for his benifit.Hillary's looking better and better every day

Sidney Condorcet said...

They sky is falling according to 3:49pm. Neither white men nor women will vote for Obama?! Please...Most of Hillary's female supporters are true blue Democrats. Once the nomination battle is over the rancor will subside. Hillary will campaign with and endorse Barack Obama and help smooth over the tensions. Women voters will not en masse move to McCain. Quite the opposite, actually.

Sure, I think McCain will get the majority of white men. But Obama will win educated, affluent white men. He'll also overwhelmingly win among young white men. He'll also win 96% of blacks and a very good majority of women, who will be turned off by McCain's age, war fever and his inability to trumpet kitchen table issues. Obama's selection of Richardson will help him win over latino voters in New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, Texas and Florida.

An Obama-Richardson ticket is an electoral lock: California, Connecticut, Wisconsin, Vermont, Maine, Massachusetts, Washington, Oregon, Illinois, Minnesota, Hawaii, Maryland, Rhode Island, Delaware, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, Missouri, Ohio, Nevada.

That's 224 electoral votes. Richardson on Obama's ticket also bolster's Democratic chances at making Texas and its 34 electoral votes competitive.

Obama/Richardson would also be competitive in New Hampshire, Florida, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Iowa.

There is no way McCain just walks off with this one easily. No matter how bad the smear tactics get. Obama will heavily..heavily..outspend the publicly-funded McCain in a year that is extremely favorable for Democrats. In fact, there's a good chance that Obama blows the entire roof off this electoral map of ours...

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Ostroy and the wise contributors to this blog are absolutely right - Obama does not have a chance of winning. And, it has been obvious from the beginning; and, if not then, obvious since Wright. And, I along with others are furious at the tslk shows, the TV and press and the naive Obama supporters. And I would add the STUPID Democratic leadership starting with Ted and the other Kennedy's, to all the others in power supporting Obama. There is no excuse for them because they have been in politics long enough to know better. Ted should have learned something after his losing campaign, and he was a "Kennedy" who was a sure to win. They HAVE to know what the Republicans are going to do with the Wright, the slum lord, the wife, the voting record, the "presents", the lack of experience, and, yes, he's black. Even if it's a blot on Americans, as one suggested, it is a fact. THe KKK is active again and making campagin rallies to "save the white race." It has gotten obvious, ugly and inevitable. There is going to be a vicious ugly campaign. Obama will not be able to fight it. He's not that much of a fighter as it is. And, as some one pointed out previously, the Republicans are so anxious for Obama to be the Dem candidate that Rupert's daughter is hosting a fund raiser.

Not only that, Richardson is not well-liked either for his treachery. Also, many workers are furious at Hispanics too for "taking jobs away" from them. And, I am furious at him for his disloyalty and opportunism.

Don't forget, Obama, himself is part of the reason for this angry and divisive situation. He has never settled his "Wright problem". And the problem with Wright in addition to his cursing America is the revelation to many white people that they are dispised by a large portion of the black population. That is not easy to live with and surely not condusive to electing a black president.

Anonymous said...

Two hundred women were saved from slavery in Texas, held by a religious group which was represented by one of the presidential hopefuls. At least I think it is a Morman church If I'm wrong please correct me. No matter, there is no national outrage about the slavery. Not only are these women only a portion of the slavery of women, no nataional outrage about that either. Yet, Wright is still seething over slavery over a hundred years ago and all the Democrats are feeling guilty.

A woman candidate for president can't get equal time or even fair press coverage. No outrage about that.

Two candidates that belong to hate groups were and are running to be President of the United States -- the most powerful job in the world.

THere's talk that Romney could be the the VP candidate. What position might Wright get?

Anonymous said...

America is racist...America is racist...Anonymous 5:05pm can stop his incessant hollering. We get what you're trying to say: America sucks, never strive to make progress, things can never improve, be afraid of the KKK.

Man, this guy would have stood in the way of the civil rights movement arguing "No, you can't."

"And, as some one pointed out previously, the Republicans are so anxious for Obama to be the Dem candidate that Rupert's daughter is hosting a fund raiser." Umm, Murdoch himself has raised money for Hillary Clinton. He plays both sides of the aisle, dummy. Big deal.

Richardson is guilty of treachery? Sheesh, you clearly don't know what treatchery is. I'd like to know why you're not as angry with McCain and Hillary for voting for our little misadventure in Iraqy as you are about the New Mexico governor endorsing the likely nominee, Barack Obama. Get your priorities straight.

"Don't forget, Obama, himself is part of the reason for this angry and divisive situation. He has never settled his "Wright problem"." Umm, plenty of Presidents came into office not having settled their own particular issue. Recall Bill Clinton's affairs in '92 (gennifer flowers); Bush's alcoholism, drunk driving, draft-dodging, cocaine use.

You're either a Republican troll or a Clinton supporter who cannot face the reality that she lost and that the Democratic nominee deserves your support as he will pursue Democratic policies, rather than the Republican policies (and wars) that McCain will implement.

Age quod agis!

Anonymous said...

5:27 You are a hopeless fool.

The only one of your idiotic points I'll respond to is CLinton and his sex life.

Sexual escapades do not equal hating a country and an entire race. I'm talking about Wright in case you don't get it and I'll point out the racism on both sides.

For the record since I think you're a Repug and have used the argument about Bush lying about the WMDs and Clinton and MOnica -- sex doesn't equal starting a war and resulting in deaths.

Grow up. Opps -- you're prbobably a grown Religious Right Reasoner.

Anonymous said...

Wright does not hate America. The guy VOLUNTEERED to fight in the Marines when he could have easily sought a deferment. He CRITICIZED America!! If I happened to be an african-american resident of New Orleans in 2005, you'd best believe that I would say "God Damn America". To criticize your nation and talk about its shortcomings is at the very heart of PATRIOTISM.

Quit getting your white, lace panties in a bunch over a black pastor's criticisms (some justified, some wildly off-base) of his nation. He has served his nation with honor. He has worn a uniform. Have you? He has earned the right to criticize the nation he dedicated himself toward.

Rev. Jeremiah Wright is a patriot. Sure, some of what he said was idiotic, but so what? Moreover, none of those criticisms even dripped from the lips of the candidate, Barack Obama. Only a Bush stooge would believe that criticism of America is tantamount to hatred for America. Get your Bush-loving head out of your arse.

Anonymous said...


"the Wright affair was a standard, bitter fight over narrative. Wright told one variation of an African-American narrative. To white listeners, that story was not only irrational but an act of aggression - in that it portrayed whites as aggressive. Obama, running as a multiracial candidate, needed both to reject the story and avoid doing so."
"As a candidate, Obama couldn’t disown Wright completely because to do so would be to attack not just the Aids story but the wider narrative, and thereby to attack his own community. Instead, he criticized a third basic flaw of ethnic narratives: the fallacy of timelessness: The past is the present is the future.

Very softly, he also alluded to a white, working-class American narrative of blacks getting unfair advantages. He had to be even more delicate with this one - after all, in the American story, someone half-white is all black, so he’s an outsider. And he’s a candidate, seeking consensus - not a professor or a pundit. He couldn’t say that working class whites sometimes blame blacks for their lack of opportunity because America’s story of itself doesn’t have much room for explanations based on entrenched class privilege.

So what he did instead was to try to offer a new, shared American narrative: All this racial tension is real, it’s part of our past. But the real American story is about constant progress toward a “more perfect union.” Even the constitution started out stained by racism - but can be perfected.

He also offered a symbol for the change: himself. I’m not black, he said, I embody the multiracial future, I’m America reborn."

Put that in your pipe and smoke it...

Anonymous said...

6:11 Not enough substance to put in my pipe and smoke it. -- All smoke and mirrors. All rationalization and ultimately illusion if not delusion.

Anonymous said...

Poor, poor Obama. If we would believe 6:11 the trials he has had to face have been monumental -- loving grandparents who gave him the best; Harvard that gave him a break; and now nothing but adoration and support from the press, pundits and the Democratic Party. No wonder he's so strong and such a fighter forsaking nuance for effectiveness. Whereas, it's certainly been a cake-walk for Hillary and yet she's behind in the polls. Go figure.

Anonymous said...

6;11 Please explain how Obama could think there is "constant progress to a more perfect union" when his very own pastor, whom he suports with large sums of money and supports emotionally, is screaming lies about our government and cursing it, as well as preaching hatred for white people. That is not progressing toward anything but hatred, trouble and failure.

I agree we can have a "more perfect union" but his way and Wright's way is not the way to go.

Anonymous said...

I must be the only woman who reads this blog. I'm outraged at the attention being given to the mistreatment of black people, when black men have far more privileges and support than women of any color in our country. No one is screaming about the sexism in covering Hillary. No one is screaming that women have to work harder and yet don't get as far as any man in the country. No one is scraming about spousal abuse; no one is pointing out a woman can't be a Catholic Priest or a Baptist preacher; a woman who happens to get a job on TV as anchor gets less money and has to appear as a sex object; and most American women have to work full-time and do all the household chores too. But what really makes me mad is the way Hillary has been treated and no one, but Ostroy, is sensitive to that.

I will no longer watch Olbmerman, Matthews, David Gregory and his gang, nor will I watch most of the hosts on CNN.

This campaign has been an eye-opener on so many levels. I didn't know blacks hated me and I didn't know so many men, among them highly regarded professionals, hated women, or at least want to give them no advantages.

Anonymous said...

This campaign has been an eye-opener to me as well. I didn't realize so many Americans were stupid. When did it become "being against Hillary's campaign is tantamount to being against women" or "being against Obama is being against blacks". this is all ridiculous. At the end of the day, democrats must vote for the democrat and independents can vote for the lesser of two evils. That's it, plain and simple. Obama, love him or hate him, love Wright or hate him, is the lesser of evils. He won't get us mired in as many wars as McCain. He'll try to universalize health care, unlike McCain. To me, it's really that simple. Everyone on this board is screaming to play identity politics....I'm a woman, help me!!! I'm an endangered white male, SAVE ME from the Black Man who hates our nation. PLEASE SPARE ME!! Quit trying to cloud our choices with bullshit. Hillary, love her or hate her, is over. The ultimate choice is the war-loving McCain or the more rational, if baggage heavy, Obama. Give me Obama or give America an Empire...the choice is simple...

Anonymous said...

Obama will not win. It's state by state not who has the most votes overall. I wonder where all the naive Obama supporters have been for the last 8 years? They certainly have forgotten just how Republicans play the game. They love to lie, cheat and make a fool of you.

It is so obvious they do not know how elections are won. You do not tick off your base (women) and expert to win in November.

Anonymous said...

Just how strong of a candidate can Obama be if he threw Ed Shultz under the bus for telling the truth about McCain?

(McCain is a war monger.)

If Obama is caving to McCain now, how will he be strong in the run up to November?

Will you Obama obsessed supporters get your heads out of the sand?

Anonymous said...

10:44 Being against Hillary is being against women when people like Chris Matthews says on world-wide TV: "Hillary looked like a school bus in that yellow pants suit." It's against women when Ferraro is criticized for saying Obama got where he is because he's black and Matthews gets a pass when he says Hillary is where she is because of her husband.

It's sexist when OBama gets all the good coverage and Hillary gets bashed constantly.

You're either too stupid to see the differences are you're a sexist.

Anonymous said...

LATEST NEWS: The story Hillary has told about the woman dying from lack of medical care because she couldn't afford it, IS TRUE. HILLARY WAS TELLING THE TRUTH AND THE HOSP. WAS LYING. It was "business as usual" when the Hillary haters immediately said she was the one who was lying.

Anonymous said...

9:20am, you're an irrational moron. Being against Hillary means being against women because of something Chris Matthews said? Your logic confounds anyone above a fifth grade education. That's probably the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Seriously, stop what you're doing and seek immediate medical attention. "It's sexist when Obama gets all the good coverage and Hillary gets bashed constantly."???? If you believe that statement, fine, blame the media. Write some letters. But you would have us believe that people supporting Obama should be called sexist because of the choices made by network anchors and cable news talking heads, and their producers. That logic is 100% nonsense. Seriously, see someone about that....

Anonymous said...

I agree with 9:26. You can't blame Obama and his supporters for Chris Matthews treatment of Hillary. Hillary is not going to be the nominee, so it's time we all took a collective breath and objectively judge both McCain and Obama on their POLICY AGENDA. Let's not get fooled by wedge issues again. Let's not get fooled by distractions such as McCain's temper, Obama's pastor, race or gay marriage or any other bullshit. What's their AGENDA? Who's political agenda do you identify with more and would make for an improved AMERICA? That's all that matters.

Anonymous said...

9:26 I don't know why I deign to respond to your stupidity since you will certainly not understand the logic. 'BEING AGAINST HILLARY MEANS BEING AGAINST WOMEN BECAUSE OF SOMETHING CHRIS MATTHEWS SAID."

First of all, if you get your head out of your feed bucket you'd know that it is agreed among most "pundits" that Hillary has gotten poor press and coverage.

Second, quoting Matthews was an example of her poor press and her being targeted in a sexist way, and has nothing to to with causing others to be against Hillary and women. (No one says Obama looks like a anorexic teenager in grownup clothes. That would be sexist like saying Hillary looks like a school bus in her yellow suit.)

3 The reason for mentioning Matthews was to point out that no big deal was made of his remark about HIllary's reason for being a candidate, although Ferraro was lambasted by the press and got death threats from Obama supporters.

4, The contributor didn't say Obama supporters were sexist but said the press and Hillary's public coverage was. Too many women (who could be sexist but no proof or indication ) on Obama's team to accuse him of that.

You need remedial reading and a course in logic at the very least.

As to 10:57 Hillary may not be the Dem. candidate but Obama will not be president. He simply cannot win. If there's not an independent entry who is viable, McCain is the next president.

Anonymous said...

No possible way McCain wins this election. The nation has been trending democratic since 2006 and with the economy in shambles and McCain's weakness on economic issues, Obama will be the next President. The Hillary supporters, like 1:36pm, who believe Obama cannot win are merely angered that he beat their own favorite candidate. Your anger blinds you to the fact that Obama stands a very good chance at beating the War Candidate who isn't even popular among the rank-and-file of his own party. Your candidate lost, get over it and quit whining!!

Anonymous said...

Maybe Hillary got poor press coverage because she's Hillary (see bosnia-gate, nafta-lies, Bill's South Carolina "southern" strategy, her faked southern drawl, her serial exaggerations of her record, her "not that I know of" hesitation on Obama's religion).

Some talking heads are indeed sexist. (I"m looking at you Chris Matthews!!) But I don't think any woman candidate would get this poor press coverage. Hillary has been disliked by 50% of the public, rightly or wrongly, for years before she even entered the race. She's run a pretty terrible campaign from the start and has made quite a few serious gaffes. She gets poor press coverage because of the candidate she is, and not because she's a woman. Although labeling all opposition to her as "sexist", just like labeling any and all opposition of Obama as "racist" or opposition to Israeli policies "anti-semitic" is a useful canard that fools like you use as a means to shield you from the glaring, negative aspects of your preferred candidate.

This race is over. I'm sorry your candidate lost. But now we have another extremely serious and momentous race ahead. Vote for McCain and his disastrous policies out of anger that the media may have been sexist or because Obama bested your candidate....Or vote for Barack Obama, a good man who will advance the Democratic agenda!! The choice is simple...don't let the repugs distract you!

Anonymous said...

2:14 Your stupid critique of Hillary's compaign faults is pathetic. Her southern drawl? How about Michelle's and Obama]s doing their version of black street talk? Michelle was particularly offensive. What about Obama's slum lord and traitor preacher? What about his lies about bills he supported? What about Obama's "present" only voting history? What' about Obama's speech about racism that didn't mention the advamcements that have been made nor his spirtiual leader's damnation of America?

As for Hillary saying "as far as I know" -- she IS a lawyer and deals with attesting to what she knows to be true. If it had been revealed the next day he was a Muslim the headlines would be HILLARY LIED ABOUT OBAMA'S RELIGION>

She can't win with you people. And he can win the presidency.

Anonymous said...

It seems everyone has forgotten history. We have Obama and Clinton. Obama, so far has the reverend Wright issue, Clinton has been clearly without a doubt, proven to lie to the public. Couple that with her association with Bill Clinton in the '90s you have this perpetual concept of lying being reinforced with recent events. If you recall, the media constantly pegged the label of liar and perpetual exagerator to Gore in the 2000 election, which he did win by the skin of his teeth, only to be denied by the supreme court, and even though the accusations against Gore were taken out of context and proven to be lies themselves they were devastating due to how close it was, on the other hand they have actual video proof Hillary lied. You tell me what is easier to defend against. Your own words, or someone else's words that never came out of your mouth. The Wright issue is very minor indeed considering the fact that 81% in this country feel that we are on the wrong track. I guess that's why the impact was actually quite minimal, as compared to the Hillary lies impact disemenating through the media. I mean really, she had a 20 point lead in Pennsylvania, now cut down to the margin of error. Wake up, the only choice is Obama.

Anonymous said...

2:34 It shouldn't be necessary to point out that if one belongs to a group for twenty years and supports it financially, sends one children to hear the sermons, hears the sermons week after week, one is in agreement with that organization's precepts. If not, he is lying by being there. If so, he's lying by saying he didn't know what was going on and doesn't agree with it. Actions speak louder than words. Obama has LIED about Wright -- one way or the other.

Clinton was taught by the Jesuits that fellatio is not consdered sex. But the public was too - whatever - to accept that so he was accused of lying. Even so, that is not so serious as lying about one's beliefs in order to become president. That is one of the greatest and most harmful deceptions.

Anonymous said...

4:04PM, is yet another of the republican dolts who would have us believe that the few scandalous comments that the public has heard from Rev. Wright is what he preaches on a weekly basis. 4:04pm would have us believe that Rev. Wright is unpatriotic, an anti-white racist, etc...

4:04pm doesn't care about the facts or even trying to find the truth. He'll take a few clips out of context and try to burn Obama with them. Tired, old, pathetic politics at work here. Pay no attention to his feeble-minded attempt to tar-and-feather the next President of the United States based on the scandalous, though out of context, words of his Pastor.

Anonymous said...

4:04PM, is yet another of the republican dolts who would have us believe that the few scandalous comments that the public has heard from Rev. Wright is what he preaches on a weekly basis. 4:04pm would have us believe that Rev. Wright is unpatriotic, an anti-white racist, etc...

4:04pm doesn't care about the facts or even trying to find the truth. He'll take a few clips out of context and try to burn Obama with them. Tired, old, pathetic politics at work here. Pay no attention to his feeble-minded attempt to tar-and-feather the next President of the United States based on the scandalous, though out of context, words of his Pastor.

Anonymous said...

4:13 is a Republican mole. They are salivating over the thought of Obama being their opponent.

Anonymous said...

Is this website so pro-Clinton that any comments that are pro-Obama are automatically deemed to have come from a "Republican mole"? Ridiculous...I doubt a "Republican mole" would try to play down the Rev. Wright issue...

Trust me, the Republicans are salivating over any Democrat. Hillary has nearly 50% negatives, and Obama is black, has a funny name, and associated with the wacky Rev. Wright. In an otherwise cakewalk year for Democrats, the Dems have TWO uniquely vulnerable candidates, while the Republicans nominated the one member of their party who has a shot at picking up enough independents to win this year.

Should be a tight race whether it's Obama or Clinton.

Anonymous said...

I love the way anyone that has a negative word to say about Obama is a racist or ignorant, you know that phrase you all like to say "any intelligent person couldn't think that way." Well I am an intelligent person, and no matter how you of such wisdom can state that a difference of opinion is not intelligent really shows your ignorance. If the best thing you can come up with is the stupid phrase, GET A LIFE, those of us with brains, know that there is no way Obama can win, not because he is not a possible candidate someday, just not this day, so the republicans get to do a two for one thing with this election, they get to destroy Obama, and Clinton in one grand gesture, and you all help. No one gives Clinton a break, I try to tell myself it is not because she is a woman, yet I can't believe that the same people who tell us that Obama can't be guilty by association to someone like Wright, but Clinton is being fried because of a personal problem with her husband, if every woman that had a problem like this with her husband was to vote for Clinton she would win easily. But now as I see there are so many of you Obama people that feel he is forgiven for sitting in that church for 20 years. Then the real reason for not voting for Clinton must be gender, and yet we all have mother's we don't all have ministers like Obama, so the fact that we could actually have this much anomosity against Clinton is really disappointing.

Anonymous said...

When did Wright declare his candidacy? I didn't realize that Obama nad Wright were the same person. I guess that means Hillary and Monica Lewinsky/Paula Jones/Bill Clinton are running against him in the Dem primary, and John McCain, Rev Hagee/George Bush/McCain's first wife that he cheated on are waiting in the general. Why don't you bozos grow up and evaluated the candidate's based upon their actions and positions rather than using every possible unsavory supporter or past association as the stand-in for that candidate?
The fact that Hillary has gotten her butt kicked by Obama shows how incredibly weak she is, and that she would get destroyed in the general by a 90 yr old serial adulterer and warmonger

Anonymous said...

To those who think Obama is getting some kind of pass from the media, please imagine what would happen to Obama if he lied about running from sniper fire. The press would never let it go... he'd plummet down to near zero in the polls, that's what.

Please imagine what would happen to Obama if he was caught on tape singing "bomb-bomb Iran". He'd be gone by now, that's for sure.

You may recall the pass Clinton had for months on end as it was suggested by the media that she'd be the nominee... she had that "air of inevitability".

Reverend Wright is not the candidate. McCain and Clinton have made more mistakes than Obama has, and that's the reason we're where we are.

If Hillary ends up the nominee, she'll get killed on all of the old Clinton scandals, the Bosnia lie (and other less than truthful Clinton moments) and we'll never hear the end of scandals over Bill's dealings with foreign governments, and library donors.

Face it! No matter who we nominate, the Republicans are going to hit 'em with the smear machine. The question is whether we fight back united, or not.

Anonymous said...

Damn straight!!

Anonymous said...

The Klanservatives were destined to race-bait Obama, although they will do it in a way that they consider to be "subtle."

When they remind Klanservative voters about his "heritage," they won't be talking about his "Muslim" heritage, even if that's what they say. Klanservative voters know the code all too well; they knew what the REAL agenda was bhind the persecution of gays in 2004. The Goppers meant to make racism respectable again. For more evidence of what the Gopper agenda really is, check out the ties between "values" groups and the Ku Klux Klan.

Anonymous said...

Wow == It's really unforgivable that Hillary would exaggerate for whatever reason what happened on a trip she took; and it's unforgivable that her husband had sex with another women and Hillary saved her marriage and kept her vows; and unforgivable that -- I can't remember the other complaints. Yet, it is perfectly all right for Obama to lie about legislation he said he's done; that's he's associated with a criminal now in court on trial; that he lied about his father and Harvard; that his spokesman told the Canadian government not to pay any attention to Obama's campaign pledges - they were just to win; and that he is closely united with a man and a church and a movement that owes its allegiance to Africa, first; that blames whites and the government for all their troubles and that Obama has not disassociated, even now, with that group.