Another stellar example of Obama's leadership credentials are in his handling of attempts to tie his campaign to Louis Farrakhan. Farrakhan endorsed Obama. And Obama clearly denounced it (and rejected it after clumsy bullying by Hillary Clinton during the last Democratic debate). Then I hear (from Republican friends) that Obama is "meeting with Louis Farrakhan" and he "is probably a closet Muslim." This is the sort of shitstorm that probably awaits Obama from the Republican slime machine. But any honest person has to admit that there was never any doubt that Obama doesn't share Farrakhan's views. That said, honest people are in short supply during presidential elections. Obama must continue to calmly and rationally swat down ridiculous accusations like these. All indications are that he will continue to do so.
On the other side of the aisle we have Granpa Munster, John McCain. He was recently endorsed by John Hagee, a man who's views are every bit as reprehensible as Louis Farrakhan's. Yet McCain refused to reject the endorsement. Why? Because McCain covets the religious right vote thinking that he cannot win without it. He is probably correct. But this difference between McCain and Obama is compelling. When confronted with an endorsement from an abhorent individual, one bravely denounces it, the other embraces it.
And that is another reason why Barack Obama will be the next president of the United States of America.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
LIKE A LITTLE girl whose Chief Executive Barbie is falling from her fingertips into the sea, Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential ambitions are slipping tragically from her grasp. This may explain her increasingly unhinged behavior, which would be bad enough were she winning. To lose the Democratic nomination this way, however, is particularly pathetic.
Consider her campaign's reported peddling of a photo of Sen. Barack Obama in traditional Somali clothing. Emerging soon before Tuesday's Texas and Ohio primaries, this was more than a zany picture of an exotically dressed politician, like that of Clinton herself touring Vietnam in a sloped hat. This 2006 photo, snapped during a five-nation African fact-finding mission, could ignite suspicions that Obama is a closet Muslim, a turban-clad terrorist sympathizer, or that other surprises may lurk just beneath his black skin.
Team Clinton could have stamped out any suspicions they were behind this, just as forcefully as Team McCain doused The New York Times' front-page "news story" asserting inappropriate ties between him and a female lobbyist. McCain's top staffers and surrogates immediately denounced this gossip on TV and online. McCain personally rejected these allegations at a 9 a.m. press conference. By noon, these accusations were extinguished, and the Gray Lady's dwindling reputation was reduced to cinders.
Clinton's team quickly could have refuted the Drudge Report's claim that it e-mailed this photo while writing: "Wouldn't we be seeing this on the cover of every magazine if it were HRC?"
Instead, a senior Clinton staffer told FOX News on Monday: "There are 700 people in our organization. We can't be sure it didn't come from us." Clinton later said, "I know nothing about it."
This would be more plausible if this were the Clinton camp's first suspected anti-Obama smear. Alas, as Obama's political guru, David Plouffe, observed, "This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire and it's exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans."
At a Feb. 21 debate, Clinton seemed especially conciliatory toward her rival. "I am honored to be here with Barack Obama," she said, shaking his hand. "I am absolutely honored."
Two days later in Cincinnati, she came undone.
"Shame on you, Barack Obama!" Clinton snapped. Like a diesel-powered dental drill, she squealed: "Enough with the speeches, and the big rallies, and then using tactics that are right out of Karl Rove's playbook."
Clinton somehow suddenly discovered leaflets that Obama's campaign has mailed out for weeks in Ohio. She complained that Obama portrayed her as pro-NAFTA, though she now says she wants the pact renegotiated or scrapped.
Obama's perspective is correct.
"I think everybody is in favor of free and fair trade," the then-first lady said in 1996. "I think NAFTA is proving its worth."
In her 2003 book, "Living History," Clinton warmly calls the North American Free Trade Agreement one of her husband's "legislative victories."
"I think, on balance, NAFTA has been good for New York and America," she said in 2004.
Obama finds Clinton's malleability on NAFTA puzzling.
"She has essentially presented herself as co-president during the Clinton years," he said. "So, the notion that you can selectively pick what you take credit for and then run away from what isn't politically convenient, that doesn't make sense."
As columnist Robert Novak reports: "Clinton insiders want to spread the message that Obama represents the radical left-wing politics of George McGovern's 1972 candidacy, which won only one state." Clinton insider Harold Ickes told journalists Monday -- the New York Daily News noted -- that "had superdelegates been at the '72 convention they may have had a different assessment about George McGovern."
This disrespect for McGovern rings hypocritical, since Clinton and her then-boyfriend, Bill, campaigned for McGovern in Texas in 1972.
What a pathetic editorial! First of all, this is not the poster's original thoughts. It is the content of columnist Deroy Murdock's recent column. I don't care if people post other people's works/thoughts here, but please attribute it. Otherwise you are just a cowardly plagiarist.
Deroy Murdock is your typical, run of the mill, blathering right wing sewer head.
Problems with this editorial? Yes! First of all, he claims that the Clinton camp leaked the Somali photo of Barack Obama. Clinton has denied it and there is no proof that she, or anyone in her camp, actually "leaked" this photo. It would make just as much sense to say that John McCain, desperate to avoid facing the Obama juggernaut leaked this photo to stall his momentum. Of course, I have no proof of this, but truth, proof and evidence are not strengths of the right wingers.
Regarding McCain's affair, yes, he denied it. So did Bill Clinton, at first. Unless there is another stained dress, though, McCain probably skates on this accusation, whether it is true or not.
So, yes, there is are valid criticisms of the Clinton campaign. She is touting herself as experienced, but in point of fact, Obama has more legislative experience than does Clinton. Both, however, have sufficient experience to be fantastic presidents. Clinton's 3AM ad was ridiculous, and Obama better come out an attack it. I think he will.
But, back to this crazy rant, this right wing screed is lunacy... but that is what we have come to expect from the verbal diarrhea experts on the right.
"Deroy Murdock is your typical, run of the mill, blathering right wing sewer head."
Actually he is a libertarian gay Afro Costa Rican. But, we expect such dribble from left wing uninformed DNC taking robots.
Yes, anonymous coward, he is gay and Costa Rican. So what? He is still your typical run-of-the-mill, mouth-breathing right-wing autocrat.
"Afro?" WTF?
Post a Comment