You are currently browsing the daily archive for September 24, 2008.
Clinton said he and his wife, national convention last month and that Hillary Clinton has traveled extensively on Obama’s behalf. That includes a tour of Michigan on Saturday.of New York, gave vigorous endorsements to Obama at the
“I think you can argue that she has done more than all other runner-ups have in the Democratic Party in 40 years,” the former president said. “We have been quite clear on this. We’re not party-wreckers, and we believe that the country needs to take a different course.”
I agree. Let the baby fight his own battles for a change. he also said:
“I just don’t believe that getting up here and hyperventilating about Gov. Palin, orfor that matter, is a productive use of a former president’s time and is not a vote-getter,” he said, adding that he admires McCain even though he disagrees with several of his positions.
Of course, Huffpo as Obama surrogates they are, slip in their W mode and blames Clinton for Obama’s eventual loss
More on that here
There are two themes of going around the Internet of what the reason will be, preemptively, if Barack Obama loses the election for presidency in November 2008 despite his lead in polls. Racism or the fall back of “It is all the Clinton’s fault.”
And some Rovian quotes
— Rove didn’t predict the outcome in November, but said if Hillary was on the Obama ticket “the election would be over already”. (Bill Clinton has said this week she didn’t want to be VP).
— He said Palin could beat Hillary in 2012.
Adding the link to the Larry King video
McCain says he will stop campaigning after addressing Bill Clinton’s Global Initiative session tomorrow and return to Washington to focus on the nation’s financial problems.
“I do not believe that the plan on the table will pass as it currently stands, and we are running out of time.” McCain said if Congress does not pass legislation to address the crisis, credit will dry up, people will no longer be able to buy homes, life savings will be at stake, and businesses will not have enough money.
Obama? Still waiting.
I am using the metaphor Wes Clark applied to NCLB and public education
I think, by the same measure, Obama was TPTB of permanently neutralizing the Democratic party as the party of the people.
Take a candidate who s “not so invested in the fights of the 60’s and the 70s” but thanks to his skin color can pretend long enough he represents democrats
Finance well and make the grassroots think they have a voice in this thing
I had glimpses of this takeover before
Make no mistake about it, the only thing the new Democratic Party has in common with the old one is the name. Itâ€s like the creature from the movie Alien. The party was forcibly impregnated by usurpers that grew from the inside out, eventually shedding its host and killing it in the process.””
And that explains the willingness of the forces that brought us Bush to support this guy
For all intents and purposes
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS OVER
and if they get away with it, the Bush times will be remembered as
THE GOOD OLD TIMES
Which in no small measure, was the point.
I did live an interesting life! For years I cried at the absurdity of the ‘liberal media” moniker – then I thought I achieved some victory in the “Main stream” change – that at least didn’t say the opposite.
And now, I am witnessing the same degree of bias – only for the other side of the isle – and no, it’s still not “liberal media”
Tony Blankley takes a look (from the right)
While they have been liberal and blinkered in their worldview for decades, in 2007-08, for the first time, the major media consciously are covering for one candidate for president and consciously are knifing the other. This is no longer journalism; it is simply propaganda.
So, no, they were never liberal, and they did covered for the candidate of the other side before, but agree on what they do now
The image of Obama that the press has presented to the public is not a fair approximation of the real man. They consciously have ignored whole years of his life and have shown a lack of curiosity about such gaps, which bespeaks a lack of journalistic instinct.
Thus, the public image of Obama is of a “man who never was.”
and he realistically lists what’s going on:
The mainstream media ruthlessly and endlessly repeat any McCain gaffes while ignoring Obama gaffes. You have to go to weird little Web sites to see all the stammering and stuttering that Obama needs before getting out a sentence fragment or two. But all you see on the networks is an eventually clear sentence from Obama. You don’t see Obama’s ludicrous gaffe that Iran is a tiny country and no threat to us. Nor his 57 American states gaffe. Nor his forgetting, if he ever knew, that Russia has a veto in the U.N. Nor his whining and puerile “come on” when he is being challenged
That editing of the stammering sounds familiar…yeah, the media used to do it for the guy still in the White House.
And then, I need to agree with Blanley – not over did the pendulum swing to the other side, but it went way out higher than anything we ever seen
More appalling, a skit on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” last weekend suggested that Gov. Palin’s husband had sex with his own daughters. That show was written with the assistance of Al Franken, Democratic Party candidate in Minnesota for the U.S. Senate. Talk about incest.
For fairness sake, I remember a gross skit on Mad in 2004 having a Vietnamese woman say Kerry raped her, but that was one wild note in that bias cacophony, while in 2008, with Cho, Bernhardt and Rangel – this tone is becoming standard.
Blankley also rigtfully complains on the lack of reporting on Obama’s associates
In only two weeks, the media have focused on all the colleges Gov. Palin has attended, her husband’s driving habits 20 years ago, and the close criticism of the political opponents Gov. Palin had when she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska.
But in two years, they haven’t bothered to see how close Obama was with the terrorist Ayers.
Nor have the media paid any serious attention to Obama’s rise in Chicago politics. How did honest Obama rise in the famously sordid Chicago political machine with the full support of Boss Daley?
Not realizing that this happened before, Blankley continues
That conspiracy not only has Photoshopped out all of Obama’s imperfections (and dirtied up his opponent McCain’s image) but also has put most of his questionable history down the memory hole.
They did this for Bush too. Which only makes me more afraid of their motives. because where Blankley sees “liberals” I see the same people who brought us Bush. And the Iraq war.
Now they are thrusting Obama down the throat of the the media dumbed American voter.
As I saw the howwible asshlery of Chris Rock on Letterman – this is the other mindboggling side of the coin: B0bots think they overcame the system!
ROCK: And then… She lost! Stop it!! She lost. And she did, and it’s not sexism, the reason she lost. She lost to a black guy nobody heard of. She didn’t lose to the power. Ooh, the power got her.
And watch for it – this myth is going to be paraded further if they actually manage to trump the actual vote count the way they goose the polls these days (playing with the samples)
This report will be dismissed by a large swath of B0bots as it comes from the DLC.
But whatever you may think of them, it’s the first sane opinion since Brazile took the airways and declared “we don’t need the working class anymore”
Funny they had to make a report to say i. I call it “The Duh Report”
The report, titled “Who are the swing voters,” finds that the party must make historic inroads with working class whites in order to create a sustainable presidential majority.
Reminds me of those medical studies that confirm that “chicken soup is indeed good for you”
“There has been so much emphasis on new entrants in the electorate, and this report is historic and not predictive, but history tells us it would be an unusual circumstance if we witnessed a massive shift in the electorate,” the DLC analysis reads.
The report calculates that a 10 percent increase in black voter turnout amounts to a 1-percentage point uptick in the overall electorate, assuming all other groups remain constant.
Again, how many ways can one say “Duh”?
That means that if the black voting rate rises from 60 percent to 67.2, the level of whites as measured by the Census Bureau, it amounts to 1.7 million votes— less than George W. Bush’s margin of victory in 2004.
I’ll let the comments on this fall by the wayside. A more correct historical perspective
Obama did poorest in the Democratic primaries with white working class voters. Like Gary Hart, Paul Tsongas, and Howard Dean, Obama was most popular with what are sometimes referred to as “wine track Democrats,” college educated, while Hillary Clinton eventually coalesced those commonly called “beer track Democrats,” working class.
and more examples
In 2004, Democrat John Kerry lost working class white men by 30 percentage points and working class white women by 19 points–using the DLC’s definition. In 2000, Bush won working class white men by 31 points and working class white women by 9 points.
According to the DLC’s definition of the white working class, according to the most recent poll by the Pew Research Center for People & the Press, McCain is winning women by 18 points and men by 23 points. Like with whites overall, it appears some traditional GOP voters remain undecided and so McCain’s numbers actually tack low as well as Obama’s.
So, you racist, bitter old and uneducated – you may vote for Obama now. We’ll even stop calling you racist – at least on Election Day!