It is not just Obama supporter the Rev. Wright who has made racist speeches from the pulpit, as the above video of Obama supporter James Meeks shows, complete with his fiery condemnation of white politicians and liberal use the the N-word.
|
|---|
Monday, March 24, 2008
NEW OBAMA CAMPAIGN LOW: SUPPORTER REFERENCES BILL CLINTON 'STAIN ON MONICA'S BLUE DRESS'
[CNN.com]
Sen. Hillary Clinton's aides blasted Sen. Barack Obama's campaign Monday after a major Obama supporter referenced the blue dress at the heart of former President Bill Clinton's impeachment scandal, CNN reports.
Here is the full CNN story:
Gordon Fischer, a former chair of the Iowa Democratic Party and part of Obama's Iowa support team, also compared Bill Clinton unfavorably to Joe McCarthy.
McCarthy was a senator who was known for leveling accusations that people were Communists or spying for the Russians in the 1950s.
"When Joe McCarthy questioned others' patriotism, McCarthy (1) actually believed, at least aparently (sic), the questions were genuine, and (2) he did so in order to build up, not tear down, his own party, the GOP," Fischer, wrote on his blog.
Fischer was referring to Bill Clinton's comments over the weekend that a race between Sen. John McCain and Hillary Clinton would be a contest between two people who love their country. Some Obama supporters -- including former Air Force Gen. Tony McPeak -- have interpreted that statement as an attack on Obama's patriotism.
Sen. Hillary Clinton's aides blasted Sen. Barack Obama's campaign Monday after a major Obama supporter referenced the blue dress at the heart of former President Bill Clinton's impeachment scandal, CNN reports.
Here is the full CNN story:
Gordon Fischer, a former chair of the Iowa Democratic Party and part of Obama's Iowa support team, also compared Bill Clinton unfavorably to Joe McCarthy.
McCarthy was a senator who was known for leveling accusations that people were Communists or spying for the Russians in the 1950s.
"When Joe McCarthy questioned others' patriotism, McCarthy (1) actually believed, at least aparently (sic), the questions were genuine, and (2) he did so in order to build up, not tear down, his own party, the GOP," Fischer, wrote on his blog.
"Bill Clinton cannot possibly seriously believe Obama is not a patriot, and cannot possibly be said to be helping -- instead he is hurting -- his own party. B. [Bill] Clinton should never be forgiven. Period. This is a stain on his legacy, much worse, much deeper, than the one on Monica's blue dress."
Fischer was referring to Bill Clinton's comments over the weekend that a race between Sen. John McCain and Hillary Clinton would be a contest between two people who love their country. Some Obama supporters -- including former Air Force Gen. Tony McPeak -- have interpreted that statement as an attack on Obama's patriotism.
NY TIMES: HOW HILLARY CAN WIN THE NOMINATION
The New York Times writes today:
To listen to some of the discussion about the Democratic presidential contest these days, one would think that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton should have spent Easter weekend in Chappaqua, writing her withdrawal speech and preparing for her return to the Senate.
But it’s not impossible. There remains at least one scenario where Mrs. Clinton could win. It gives succor to her supporters, and presumably Mrs. Clinton herself, and is something to keep in mind watching the two of them head toward the endgame of their contest.
The electorate that matters most now are not the voters waiting to go to the polls in the 10 nominating contests that remain between now and June. Instead, it is the superdelegates, — the elected officials and party leaders who have automatic status as uncommitted delegates and whose votes are needed to put either Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton over the top. There are about 800 of them, and they are going be weighing two main arguments: Mr. Obama’s contention that the Democratic rank-and-file has expressed its will and superdelegates shouldn’t overturn it, and Mrs. Clinton’s brief that she offers the party the best chance to defeat Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, this fall.
Mrs. Clinton’s best hope now is that Mr. Obama, as a candidate, suffers a political collapse akin to what has happened to the subprime mortgage market, a view shared by aides in both campaigns.
How could that happen? First, if Mrs. Clinton wins Pennsylvania on April 22. (She may swamp Mr. Obama there.) In addition, she has to go on and post a convincing win against Mr. Obama in Indiana, a state where the two appear evenly matched. Results like those would serve to underscore concerns among some Democrats that arose after Mrs. Clinton had beaten Mr. Obama in Ohio, suggesting he was having trouble getting blue-collar white voters into his column. It is one constituency that aides to Mr. McCain see very much in play this fall.
Along the same lines, Mrs. Clinton would get some wind if she trounces Mr. Obama in the June 3 contest in Puerto Rico. Mr. Obama has had trouble in competing for Latino voters. And that has been duly noted by Mr. McCain’s aides who said they are beginning to see a general election upside — among Hispanic voters in a contest against Mr. Obama — to the problems that Mr. McCain’s support of immigration legislation caused him in the primaries. (That is one reason why the endorsement that Mr. Obama won last week from Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who is one of the country’s leading elected Hispanic officials, had significance going far beyond the Democratic nominating contest).
But neither of those two factors would be enough. What Mrs. Clinton is going to need is for Mr. Obama to suffer a collapse in polls by the time super-delegates are being pressed to make up their minds.
Could that happen? The most pressing question now is the extent to which Mr. Obama has succeeded in dealing with the incendiary statements made by his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., which rocked his candidacy last week.
In this case, as a political matter, the audience that counts is general election voters — not Democratic primary voters, party leaders, editorial writers or television commentators. Two months is a long time, and it is simply too soon to say if the political imprint of an acclaimed speech by Mr. Obama will begin to fade, overcome by the potent images of Mr. Wright at the pulpit.
Superdelegates are, by nature, political animals. They appreciate the potential political price if they are perceived as overturning the will of voters, and blocking what so many Democrats view as a historic candidate. They are also hungry to win the White House and, in many cases, more committed to the success of the Democratic Party than to the fortunes of any specific candidate. They surely will pause if polls two months from now show Mr. McCain with a sudden and sizable lead over Mr. Obama.
All of which is to say that while all this could happen, it is going to take a near-perfect confluence of forces in Mrs. Clinton’s favor.
We would add to the Times: But how many media pundits have counted Mrs. Clinton dead on how many occasions so far this year.
And yet, Obama fails to close the deal…….
To listen to some of the discussion about the Democratic presidential contest these days, one would think that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton should have spent Easter weekend in Chappaqua, writing her withdrawal speech and preparing for her return to the Senate.
But it’s not impossible. There remains at least one scenario where Mrs. Clinton could win. It gives succor to her supporters, and presumably Mrs. Clinton herself, and is something to keep in mind watching the two of them head toward the endgame of their contest.
The electorate that matters most now are not the voters waiting to go to the polls in the 10 nominating contests that remain between now and June. Instead, it is the superdelegates, — the elected officials and party leaders who have automatic status as uncommitted delegates and whose votes are needed to put either Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton over the top. There are about 800 of them, and they are going be weighing two main arguments: Mr. Obama’s contention that the Democratic rank-and-file has expressed its will and superdelegates shouldn’t overturn it, and Mrs. Clinton’s brief that she offers the party the best chance to defeat Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, this fall.
Mrs. Clinton’s best hope now is that Mr. Obama, as a candidate, suffers a political collapse akin to what has happened to the subprime mortgage market, a view shared by aides in both campaigns.
How could that happen? First, if Mrs. Clinton wins Pennsylvania on April 22. (She may swamp Mr. Obama there.) In addition, she has to go on and post a convincing win against Mr. Obama in Indiana, a state where the two appear evenly matched. Results like those would serve to underscore concerns among some Democrats that arose after Mrs. Clinton had beaten Mr. Obama in Ohio, suggesting he was having trouble getting blue-collar white voters into his column. It is one constituency that aides to Mr. McCain see very much in play this fall.
Along the same lines, Mrs. Clinton would get some wind if she trounces Mr. Obama in the June 3 contest in Puerto Rico. Mr. Obama has had trouble in competing for Latino voters. And that has been duly noted by Mr. McCain’s aides who said they are beginning to see a general election upside — among Hispanic voters in a contest against Mr. Obama — to the problems that Mr. McCain’s support of immigration legislation caused him in the primaries. (That is one reason why the endorsement that Mr. Obama won last week from Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who is one of the country’s leading elected Hispanic officials, had significance going far beyond the Democratic nominating contest).
But neither of those two factors would be enough. What Mrs. Clinton is going to need is for Mr. Obama to suffer a collapse in polls by the time super-delegates are being pressed to make up their minds.
Could that happen? The most pressing question now is the extent to which Mr. Obama has succeeded in dealing with the incendiary statements made by his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., which rocked his candidacy last week.
In this case, as a political matter, the audience that counts is general election voters — not Democratic primary voters, party leaders, editorial writers or television commentators. Two months is a long time, and it is simply too soon to say if the political imprint of an acclaimed speech by Mr. Obama will begin to fade, overcome by the potent images of Mr. Wright at the pulpit.
Superdelegates are, by nature, political animals. They appreciate the potential political price if they are perceived as overturning the will of voters, and blocking what so many Democrats view as a historic candidate. They are also hungry to win the White House and, in many cases, more committed to the success of the Democratic Party than to the fortunes of any specific candidate. They surely will pause if polls two months from now show Mr. McCain with a sudden and sizable lead over Mr. Obama.
All of which is to say that while all this could happen, it is going to take a near-perfect confluence of forces in Mrs. Clinton’s favor.
We would add to the Times: But how many media pundits have counted Mrs. Clinton dead on how many occasions so far this year.
And yet, Obama fails to close the deal…….
GALLUP DAILY: OBAMA AND CLINTON BACK TO A TIE—ARE YOU LISTENING SPEAKER PELOSI?
March 24, 2008 Gallup Tracking pollThe Democratic nomination battle -- having undergone significant shifts last week during the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy -- is now back to a virtual tie between Barack Obama (favored by 47% of national Democratic voters), and Hillary Clinton (chosen by 46%).
Obama has not been able to reestablish the clear frontrunner position he enjoyed in late February, and again in mid-March. As has happened so often over the past six weeks, the race among national Democratic voters has become "too close to call."
Gallup's general election ballots, pitting presumptive Republican nominee John McCain against Obama and Clinton, continue to show McCain with a slight edge. According to the latest five-day rolling average, from March 18-22, McCain holds a three percentage point lead over Obama in the preferences of national registered voters, and a 2-point lead over Clinton.
RICHARDSON DENIES THAT HE IS LIKE JUDAS—BETRAYING THE CLINTONS FOR 30 PIECES OF SILVER
[Politico]Look, we all know that Bill Richardson sold out his long term relationship with the Clintons for a sweetheart deal job offer in (what he hopes will be) the Obama administration.
In addition, we think, based on Richardson’s Sunday morning talk interviews, that the New Mexico governor protests a little too much to James Carville’s suggestion this week-end that Richardson sold out his decades old friendship with the Clinton’s for “30 pieces of silver”:
Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a leading Clinton surrogate, responded with his own questions about Obama’s electability against McCain in the general election.“Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Richardson also decried the negativity in the Democratic primary, adding that John McCain is
coalescing his support as the Republican presidential nominee while Obama and Clinton continue to attack each other.
Richardson, who served under President Bill Clinton as energy secretary and as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, also took what appeared to be a shot at his political patron. When asked about Clinton confidante James Carville’s comment that his endorsement was an “act of betrayal,” Richardson offered his own tough talk.
“’I’m not going to get in the gutter like that, and that’s symbolic of many of the people around Sen. Clinton. They think they’re entitled to the presidency,’ said Richardson. “’It shouldn’t just be Bush-Clinton, Bush-Clinton, you know, what about the rest of us...It’s important we bring in a new generation of leadership.’”
Richardson’s sharp criticism of the Clintons is especially striking because he often defended Hillary Clinton while he was still in the race — even in the face of sharp attacks from the other presidential contenders."
Rendell cited statewide polling from automated pollsters Rasmussen and SurveyUSA that shows Obama trailing McCain in New Jersey, Ohio, Florida and Missouri — and only running even in Massachusetts.
“Our job is to nominate the candidate with the best chance to win,” said Rendell. “Bill, does it bother you that Sen. Obama is behind in New Jersey and even in Massachusetts?” Rendell asked Richardson.
EASTER MYSTERY SOLVED: OBAMA SPOTTED ON CARIBBEAN BEACH
Associated Press: “Obama was keeping such a low profile that his presidential campaign would not say where he is staying, and local officials were also mum.”Mystery solved!!!!
See video interview here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
