Monday, May 19, 2008
|
|
There Are Two Obamas Campaigning
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
10:10 AM
|
Barack Obama attempted to add Michelle Obama to the category of "those who may not be discussed," a room now full with Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, and Tony Rezko. Here's what Obama had to say this morning:
"The GOP, should I be the nominee, I think can say whatever they want to say about me, my track record," Obama said. "I've been in public life for 20 years. I expect them to pore through everything that I've said, every utterance, every statement. And to paint it in the most undesirable light possible. That's what they do."
"But I do want to say this to the GOP. If they think that they're going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful. Because that I find unacceptable," he said.
Obama praised his wife's patriotism and said that for Republicans "to try to distort or to play snippets of her remarks in ways that are unflattering to her I think is just low class ... and especially for people who purport to be promoters of family values, who claim that they are protectors of the values and ideals and the decency of the American people to start attacking my wife in a political campaign I think is detestable."
The level of dishonesty at work here is large. Michelle Obama has made long speeches full of political content in her appearances at campaign rallies made to encourage people to vote for her husband. This makes her a central figure in the campaign.
Many of her ideas are radical, like those of her husband. It is of course wrong to distort or manipulate her remarks, but playing excerpts is not only legitimate but a necessary exercise of the media's job to present the candidate and his closest advisors in full. What lacks class is the attempt to mold the media into an agent of the campaign by whining about how its coverage of speeches and statements is "detestable."
Michelle Obama's rhetoric has been full of appeals to the victim mentality, stuffed with angry rhetoric about "moving bars" and the climate of fear in the country.
Now her husband is trying to intimidate political coverage, to create a zone in which Michelle Obama and other associates can say or do anything and yet have it defined as irrelevant to his candidacy. That is a radical demand on the media, and while some in the MSM may agree to it as part of its campaign to get Obama elected, self-respecting professionals won't be intimidated and they won't be issued free passes to Mrs. Obama or any other figure that looms large in Obama's life.
|
|
Excellent point. Criticizing diety is a capital offence in certain quarters.
|
|
It's interesting how this "hands off" rhetoric sounds so familiar like those who didn't want cartoons printed.
|
|
Dudds' lurched--Unsuspecting, I'm sure--into a TRUTH. A possible First for The Dudsey at HH.
"The women here sound more intelligent than the male-guys. Tougher too."
YES, Dudsoid, you would be correct. IF you ever--you came close over the weekend--get turned over to them by The Cabal...Trust me. FALL on your Sword first, Brute. Hey, just a suggestion. |
|
Has a long story to tell.
She has worked with charities such as Operation Smile, which pays for corrective surgery on children's deformities, and Halo Trust, which calls attention to unexploded land mines. She also having visited Mother Teresea, adopted a girl with a cleft palate from an orphanage in Banghladesh. She does other charity works as well.
She has had few stumbles, acknowledged a dependency to painkillers.
Mrs. McCain said voters are right to look at her as well as her husband. "I think the American people are electing both, but from the spouse point of view, not in a leadership or decision-making aspect". |
|
|
The women here sound more intelligent than the male-guys. Tougher, too. But let's talk, exchange thoughts. Bull--- that Michele doesn't know what she's talking about. How'd you like to run for African-American First Lady? You and your "no clues".. what clues do you have? "Tough, savvy", about what? She could knock you down with a feather.. |
|
inquire, knowing the large, impressive avalanche of words it will potentially unleash...But, please, enlighten us knuckle draggers as to our 'women views'...Like the guy on the ground in 'Dirty Harry', "I gotsta know!"
K.G., 'Hawk, Jan, MaryStella...Please, hold the snickering until Blovie's finished. |
|
|
..in the bizzaro world you guys occupy. Back here on planet earth, everyone and his brother knows that Reeps have women issues. Hell, we all have women issues--but Reeps? yowzah!! |
|
Now, to *VIGFM duties...Smack'um good, Kiddo!
Don'tcha always luv it when the Dem-Dumbs & thier NOW sidekicks use women like the shrill Michelle and the 'been cosigning a serial filandering, scumbag hubby for 30+ years' as "Strong Women" Icons??!!
Gives me the Giggles. |
|
...be right. Reeps don't like strong women, remember?
Of all the idiotic things to say, PL's comment is the dumbest. Except for the black comment caca. A strong black woman could easily be the Pub candidate right this minute if she had the desire to run.
The tough, savvy, outspoken con ladies I know cannot stand Michelle. And why? Because Michelle too is a bloviator. She spouts her head off but has no clue what she's talking about. And then when she gets called on it, she and her "man" go around the TV circuit boo-hooing.
|
|
posted right next to K.G.'s! What a wonderful, charming juxtaposition. In deep alpha-sleep K.G. has a bigger(metaphorically), brassier set than PL will ever possess. Too much enjoyment is what I'm havin' here.
K.G., Darlin', you whuppin', you smackin', you drawin' blood, Babycakes! |
|
..you guys got nothing. Listen to you boo-hoo over Michelle, spitting and sputtering over crack smoking here and victimhood there. Everyone knows the score. Reeps have problems with strong women. Reeps have problems with the black experience. And most of all, Reeps have problems with people who have different opinions. These problems are so deep and pathological that they preclude gentlemanly behavior. You guys are consumed with yourselves. You don't run your ideas--your ideas run you. And they have run our country into the ground.
That's why it is a joke when Hugh ridicules Barack's fitness to be President. Who isn't fit to be President of the United States? The leadership whose certitudes are matched only by its blunders. The leadership that has poisoned the civic life of our nation. The leadership that has squandered all of its own moral authority and much of the country's.
So Hugh and the rest of you can cry a river about "radical demands" and "self-respecting professionals," but this time around, the issue is not Michelle, or Ayers, or Wright, or Rezko. No, this time around, the issue is you. |
|
...listening to Michelle's self-righteous finger wagging for 4 maybe 8 years? Michelle being the angry face and voice of America?
Laura Bush and other first ladies made a calculated decision not to make themselves a target. EleanorR, Hill and now Michelle chose to be large and in charge.
JackieO's most famous quote was "You can't quote silence." Go listen to old videos of her speaking. It's actually a shock to hear her voice, we heard it so little.
You chose to make yourelf a target, Michelle, so cowboy up and take it like a man. All this whining from a couple who has less to whine about than almost anyone on the planet is very unbecoming. It's not like anybody called her a whore or anything.
All the TN ad did was use her own words to make a point. If you want to sit at the big people's table, it's time to grow up. |
|
about Frau babakazama:
She was intentionally walked, tells one group who ask that she never got a turn at bat and another group that she hit a triple.
Shrill, obnoxious, entitled and not particularly bright. If there was ever a case against preferential admissions to presitigious colleges based soley on race, this chick is it. |
|
no one can accuse him of bad-mouthing the GOP.
Coward. Long-range sniper. Two-faced, elitist.
Obama is the kind of rich guy that makes rich guys look like jerks.
Meanwhile, he's busy telling senior citizens that McCain wants to take away their SS checks.
Who's fear-mongering now? |
|
the Clintons: two mendacious, venal operators for the price of one.
But seriously folks, babakazama did some pooor choosing when he hooked up with Michelle. Probably would have less baggage if he had stuck with the white chick he dumped when he started hanging out over at Reverend Ike's Cathedral of Crack. Smell the magic? That's "hope & change!"
The 527 ads, even if John McCain dislikes them are going to be even better that the Swiftboat.
See you in Denver! (burn baby burn) |
|
Now close your eyes and try picturing the gracious and demure Jackie Kennedy uttering some of the words that have proceeded out of the mouth of Michelle.
The mind boggles... |
|
May 18,2008
As a published freelance writer I am going to avoid Mr. Obama's North Korea like warning and actually exercise my constitutional rights surrounding freedom of the press. Something I have never read about as a material estimation rendered by a blogger or media journalist or newspaper columnist when discussing Michelle Obama and her unfortunate outbursts is the fact that she always looks like she is hunting for bear. Every First Lady I have ever seen during my lengthy residence in the USA going back to Truman was a lovely, perky, smiley and very effective individual at furthering education, light diplomacy and traveling around doing pleasant things that First Ladies do-exactly like Laura Bush does and so well. I really reject Michelle's comments but I am rather dismissive about her rhetoric because I blame Obama for not briefing a non-political wife just for the reason of taking the appropriate steps to prevent this type of damage to his campaign. My uncomfortably with her unusual statements on the stump, however, pails in comparison to my disbelief of her representing our country with the pointedly angry and thoroughly vehement look in her face.
commonsenseunlimited |
|
What I think needs to be seriously looked into with Michelle is that Iranian born Valerie Jarrett has always been there to shepherd Michelle's career, since she began working at Mayor Daley's office. Something seems wrong that Valerie happened to be given a "newly created position" that allowed her to be in charge of executive appointments at University of Chicago Hospital at a time when Michelle was also given a "newly created position" as one of 17 VP spots, earning her an additional $200,000 per year just after Obama was elected as Senator? (the only thing that changed was now being called a VP...she basically had the same Public Relations type of job...yet, she now deserved to make more than most of the top surgeons and specialists at the same hospital??)
Also odd is that Obama then turned around and gave $1,000,000.00 in earmarks to that same hospital for a "pavillion"? (this is a non profit hospital that seriously overcharges for medications, etc and ha made more in profit than the other "for profit" Chicago area hospitals...yet Obama expects us to believe he wants to make healthcare affordabe for all...just not until he's elected, right?
Has anyone checked into where Obama went off to or who he met with, when he made some "side-trips" away from the other politicians he'd gone with on his only trip to Iraq? |
|
So, maybe s/he who has not criticized or mada a smug remark about Nancy Reagan should cast the first stone?
After all, if a guy becomes President and his wife is a power-crazed liberal lawyer, she might run for President as well someday. It has been known to happen.
"pore through everything that I've said, every utterance, every statement. And to paint it in the most undesirable light possible. That's what they do."
- Ever watch MSNBC? You just described their entire line-up, except that Republicans are the targets.
"But I do want to say this to the GOP. If they think that they're going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful. Because that I find unacceptable," he said."
- And I can just picture him talking to Iran and North Korea about him finding things "unacceptable". And tapping his foot. Waiting for something to actually happen, and actually EXPECTING it to happen, because he found something "unacceptable". What a 2-year-old!!!!
Wait! Maybe he'll hold his breath next! Watch out! or "Be careful", he warns us.
Yeah, right. It's still a democracy, at least until January.
|
|
|
There is a article on it over at HuffPo why HuffPO says's Redbook is cancelling Cindy McCain's bio. Sick stuff on HuffPo but I'm sure this is a reverse Karl Rove plant in your mind. The mindless drivel of "everything" Karl Rove gets old. |
|
|
I hadn't heard they were talking about Cindy's drug abuse, and I disagree with that too. Originally, that was Karl Roves tactic to get at McCain when he was up against Bush in 2000, he also told people McCain let down his vet buddies and that he had an illegitimate black baby. |
|
Bill Clinton has been fair game throughout the Democratic primaries, at times he's been more of the headliner. Hillary Clinton has never once suggested Bill Clinton is off limits. And, no one can use a defense that Bill Clinton is a public figure; he’s now a private citizen choosing to campaign for his wife publicly. During political stops, Obama has gotten into the fray by making derogatory comments about Bill Clinton. If Obama were to abide by “his” rules, he would not have interjected commentary about Bill Clinton. Once again, Obama demonstrates he has rules for everyone else, and his own rules might not apply to himself.
Michelle Obama has gone out on the stump and she’s choosing to discuss policy issues, her personal views about the current political landscape and so forth. If Michelle was simply telling the American people how wonderful Obama is and please vote for my husband, then I might understand the discourse. However, Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are fair game for public scrutiny.
|
|
|
This is funny: " ...they should be careful. Because that I find unacceptable." As one Peachy Tolliver Carnahan said, "You've got me quakin' in me boots!" Why is the Obamicon waiting to solve the world's problems? Surely all he needs to do is say to our enemies, "You should be careful. This is unacceptable." Heh. |
|
|
Why is Cindy McCain's past use of prescription drugs an issue for the dems? It has nothing to do with John McCain's policies. It's just weasel politics that the demwits practice so well. It's now an issue and Michelle Obama will be asked for her past drug use "if any." If it's a no, you don't mind if we ask around about that do ya'? Being familiar with oppo research and all. |
|
|
oh, and it's amazing how long you can drag out paying off your student loans. When you get a nice low interest rate loan like that, you defer and pay off other debts sooner. There's no there there. |
|
Truthseeker:
"I'm still waiting...
for an answer on why Hugh puts so many negative Obama posts here and none on Clinton. Nor does he tell us why McCain is great and we should vote for him. I think I get it. Tear one down in order to build one up. I guess that's Hugh's way! Give me info I can use, not all of this senseless hogwash!"
Uh, Hugh is a partisan news analyst/ opinion giver. You want news, go to Fox or the WSJ. Also, McCain and Clinton are essentially known quantities, Obama is not, and so Hugh's trying to inform people of his qualifications (or lack thereof). Some might find it useful. Those looking for 'info' that dovetails neatly into their leftist worldview might need to look elsewhere.
Dread:
"Presumably...
Since spouses are open game, I can expect to hear you lobby Mrs. McCain to release her tax records?"
Uh, no. We're not asking you to publicize the remarks of M.O., so no, we won't be bugging the McCain's about Cindy's taxes. You be my guest, though. It's your right, as it is ours to question statements from CAMPAIGN TRAIL SPEECHES that the spouse 'presumed' candidate Obama has made. Better work on that logic.
Briggsy:
"Sure. Smear the Obama daughters too
while you're at it."
Uh, if they give CAMPAIGN TRAIL SPEECHES, they're fair game as well. So long as they do no more than pose for nice family pictures, I say lay off the children.
"You think anything to the left of the Rotary Club is radical."
If whatever is left of the Rotary Club is hanging out with an unrepentant terrorist (Bill Ayres), then yes, I'd have to agree. |
|
The dems are bringing Cindy McCain's drug use up. Why is it when the dems bring up an issue of Cindy McCain's drug use and in turn if Michelle Obama is asked if she has done drugs, it's the Republicans in the gutter?
Actually, this is an old political trick of smear your opponenet and when they respond you scream "gutter politics." Something tells me the dems should have left this one alone. I don't sense down the road Michelle Obama will handle this question well. |
|
Didn't you agree about his rejection of the gas tax cut for the summer. Economically, I'm ignorant myself, but when you have Warren Buffett on Obama's side, you've gotta admit that's something.
As for weighing in on Mrs. Obama, i;m sure she can take it, it'd just be kind of nice if our politics wouldn't be in the gutter. |
|
wide, knowing grin on my ol'kisser. Yep, as a very active anti-Vietnam War guy, I can well remember the exhileration of having literal millions in the streets during Moratorium 1970 and gazillions of us yootful enthusiasts at George McGovern Rallies in '72...And, the Americans, not on the streets & at those rallies went to the ballot boxes and VOTED OVERWHELMINGLY against McGovern and us Peaceniks!! Promise.
Jeepers, I think 'my' candidate, Senator McGovern lost ALL but 2 or 3 states. But, DAMN, we had us some durn Big Events! Ahhhhh, yes, Brobby...Y'all go on down there, General Custer. |
|
|
The dem blog posters are bringing up Cindy McCain's prescription drug use from 20 years ago. What is Michelle Obama's experience with drugs? Has she tried refer, cocaine, herion or crack? It shouldn't be an issue for either candidate but I'm the beliver if the Dems are going to play rough, the Republcians better be prepared to play rougher. Let's start asking this question on call-in radio, blogs and amongst our collegues. It's now a legitimate issue. |
|
He is incredibly ignorant regarding basic economics;foreign policy;basic history(HE IS APPEASER in CHAMBERLAIN's mode...not a would-be JFK...who was COLD WARRING rocket-rattler ...negotiator). His wife is whiny Angela Davis clone who makes Hillary look positively Thatcher-like. American electorate are not about to put these two Orwellians in the White House to Big Brother & Big Sister us with likes of Ruth Bader Ginsberg. AGAIN: Democratic remnant are heading for REALIGNMENT DISASTER(in all 57 states)in November. God Bless America: ---k Wright,Ayer/Dorn/Rudd,Retszo and all BHO's Inner Party homies and--as we say in Texas--
the horses they ride.
Arthur McVarish, Houston |
|
|
I still think attacks on Michelle Obama will just backfire in the general. Luckily for republicans (though possibly not for conservatives), John McCain has a good idea about how to win this election. |
|
|
in the line of fire. Her long drawn out speeches directed mainly to miserable Americans(they just don't know it)are meant to cause alarm and get attention. Well Michelle my Bell Obama you got it. She opened her big mouth and put her foot in it and now she and hubby think we should give her a pass because "she's" not the candidate? OK,then, shut-up. |
|
The point is not that the GOP is blindly and unncessarily attacking Michelle Obama to gain political points. The strategy is not "randomly tar his wife and maybe no one will vote for him."
The point is that her speeches underline the message of victimhood that the GOP, in my opinion rightly, believes is the sole message of the Obama campaign.
The point is that the Obamas, along with Rev. Wright and others, have had a sweet life because of this country, yet (other than Barack) they all seem to absolutely loathe it. How could Obama be married to a woman who loathes her country and belong to a church that openly loathes White America without to some degree sharing in those feelings?
This isn't dirty politics. The GOP is not twisting Michelle's words or taking them out of context (read the speeches in their entirety, they're equally damning). She's the most important person in his life. What she says, thinks and feels matters, because it impacts what Barack says, thinks and feels.
The GOP is not demanding the release of Mrs. McCain's tax statements because it has nothing to do with McCain's message. Likewise, the GOP is not beating up on Clinton because she's not making openly vengeful and derogatory remarks towards this country and its white population.
It's not that difficult to figure out. |
|
I have no doubt that you think your point escaped me....
You have a lot of "what if"s, but they're only on one side. I'm old enough to have seen plenty of these "rock star" politicians come and go, and I'm telling you, this is the emptiest suit I've ever seen. He is far more likely to collapse under the weight of a house of cards than McCain is.... Americans aren't as stupid as you apparently think they are.....
Obama can draw crowds of 17 year locusts for all I care..... it makes no difference at all.
What counts is the number of electoral votes he has come November..... Talk to me then... Until then, it's just your wishful thinking masquerading as fact, and it means nothing.... |
|
|
....according to B-slob, it's all about who draws the most people. That's why Garth Brooks was America's greatest president, and Ricky Martin has so many statues in Puerto Rico.....! |
|
Public life: regarding "public life," everything is in the definition. I'm not sure most people would agree with you that one (?) interview in a newspaper article catapults you into public life. I still think announcing a candidacy for public office (1995) marks the beginning of public life. But fine.
Student loan: You asked why I thought the loans might be comparable. He and his wife and I are about the same age. My best recollection of student lending in those days is that the student loans had a standard term of 10 years. If they had different terms, I'd love to hear about it. Based on my life experience, the numbers didn't add up.
Matters explained and explored: I'm not paying for his books. And I'm not required to base my opinion on him from his own tales. I'm still looking for some objective reporting on it. I grew up in the Chicagoland area, and I'm very disappointed with the Chicago Tribune's absence of reporting on him and his background.
Sorry for the baseless claims. |
|
Interesting how the libs now become all outraged over perceived 'personal attacks' on 'helpless females'.
They were rather quiet about it during the Clinton years. But of course that's all behind them now--they now detest the Clintons. It's a brave new Obama world for the libs.
They are so close to what they want that they can taste it. And yet they have somehow managed to nominate the one person who can, and will, lose. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Just wait until the church tapes with Michelle shrieking about 'whitey' are released.
Should be an interesting fall campaign. |
|
Rezko called to offer Obama a job in Chicago when Obama was made editor of the Law Review, so there is a long, long history with Rezko too even though Obama claims to know nothing about Rezko.
I have been asking for months now just exactly what type of community organizing Obama was doing in Chicago. Obama gave one example in his book about helping people deal with and asbestos problem in Chicago, however, one of the women who was involved with that particular incident was interviewed and she said it was not how Obama described it in his book; nor was it asbetos but rather fiberglass.
I have yet to understand how Obama can continue to pass through this process without being fully vetted.
IF he gets the nomination, does he really expect the media and people to hold back on him? Talk about naive. |
|
|
well according to you guys Obama is the nominee!!! So if he is the nominee he needs to take it like the nominee and stop the whining! |
|
Mrs. O will continue to campaign for BHO so when it comes time to criticize her comments, which will happen whenever she talks as she'll provide more fodder for discussion, is to refer not to her but to "Obama!" Actually, that'd be most appropriate since what she says is simply her husband's position, clarified for us, mere potential voters of the realm!
Let's please do anything to avoid bringing BHO's wrath down upon our souls; that would be shameful!
|
|
From the excerpt, I don't understand Obama's math. It's 2008, and he says he's been in public life for 20 years--so 20 years ago was 1988.
Now, unless I'm mistaken, he graduated from undergrad in 1983. He then spent five years in Chicago doing things that still haven't been explored and explained. He entered Harvard Law School in 1988 and graduated in 1991. Is he saying his law school years were a part of his "public life"? That doesn't make sense.
Continuing on, he evidently returned to Chicago after law school in 1991, doing things that still haven't been explored and explained. It was only in 1995 did he first run for public office. As a general observation, then, I'd say that 1995 marked his first year of public life. If so, then he's been in public life for, oh, 13 years.
What am I missing? So, what's the point? Obama has problems with timetables, and he also likes embellishing his resume. A rookie is a rookie, let's not sugarcoat it.
He and his wife seem to have timetable problems when discussing their student loans too. They have maintained that they paid them off only a few years ago. In my vocabulary, "few" equals "three." Again, it's 2008, so the loans were paid off in 2005? Yet she graduated from law school in 1988 or 1989 and he graduated in 1991. My student loans had 10-year terms. If their loans were comparable, they should have been repaid in 1999 and 2001, respectively. What's the truth with this guy? |
|
|
Since spouses are open game, I can expect to hear you lobby Mrs. McCain to release her tax records? |
|
|
for an answer on why Hugh puts so many negative Obama posts here and none on Clinton. Nor does he tell us why McCain is great and we should vote for him. I think I get it. Tear one down in order to build one up. I guess that's Hugh's way! Give me info I can use, not all of this senseless hogwash! |
|
|
|
be thrown at all us knuckle draggers for every criticism from...oh...say..June until November by O'Bammy Surrogates. The upside of that swill, I'm thinking, will be more exhaustion on the part of voters with the Dem line of crap. It will work in McJuan's favor.
B.Hussein O. and his angry-victim spouse are Toast. Clueless, Feckless TOAST. |
|
The mainstream media has acted more like a surrogate parent to Obama, and he in kind acts like the spoiled only child. The mainstream media, NYT, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS and others, have protected and shielded their boy, and now their spoiled child carries out his public tantrums when he feels the other kids (politicians) aren’t playing fair. Playing fair by Obama’s rules is only playing his way.
Too bad more of the yellow bellied journalists aren’t more willing to punish Obama when he whines or cries too much, or takeaway his toys and tell him he needs to figure out how to get along with the other kids, we can’t keep bailing you out – give Obama a little tough love rather than constant appeasement. |
|
We can't about his wife because... he says so. She can be as public as she wants to be, and we're not supposed to say anything (but Mrs. McCain should release her tax info, right?).
We're not allowed to criticize Obama's naive statements because "people are tired of that kind of politics." Except bashing W is a-okay.
Uh, yeah.
So Obama never has to answer for stupid statements like how he said he'll raise capital gains taxes even when confronted with the evidence that it will lower revenues. We're not allowed to question him. After all, he's our only hope. |
|
|
|