Thread: Democrats' dirty tricks aimed at Obama

Democrats' dirty tricks aimed at Obama

Navarrette

When historians look back on Barack Obama's presidential campaign many years from now, let's hope they pick up on one of the most interesting and important story lines.


You've heard how the 1994 midterm elections were shaped by the angry white male. Well, 2008 should be dedicated to the annoyed white liberal.
Even before his electrifying victory in Iowa, Obama had managed to smoke that creature out of its hole. As an African-American with a serious shot at winning the Democratic nomination, Obama immediately ran into condescension and hostility from white liberals who had other ideas about who should be president.
Much of this hostility comes not in response to anything that Obama said or did, but rather what he represents -- namely, an attempt by an African-American to shake up the Democratic electoral drama by going from supporting role to lead actor.
First, Joe Biden condescendingly referred to Obama as "articulate." Then, Hillary Clinton's New Hampshire co-chairman, Billy Shaheen, suggested that Obama could be unelectable in the fall campaign if Republicans claimed that he had been a drug dealer in his youth.
Then, just a couple of weeks ago, former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey, another Clinton supporter, said of Obama that he liked "the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim and that his paternal grandmother is a Muslim." Later, in explaining his remarks, Kerrey threw another jab by saying he wasn't troubled by the fact that Obama "spent a little bit of time in a secular madrassa."
Obama has said repeatedly that he is a Christian. And CNN debunked the madrassa story early in the campaign when a reporter visited the school that Obama attended in Indonesia and found that it didn't fit the description of a religious academy.
Kerrey eventually sent a letter to Obama, apologizing for his remarks.
At a time when Democratic leaders like to talk about "Republican dirty tricks," it's becoming clear that Democrats know a few of their own.
It's all so disappointing.
That's the word liberals tend to use whenever members of minority groups think for themselves, as if all those years of supporting expanded opportunity have just blown up in their faces by creating a batch of ungrateful affirmative action babies.
It's the word that angry liberals hurled at me when I defended former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales against a political smear campaign.
And it's the word that Elizabeth Edwards recently used to describe how she felt about Michelle Obama after she heard that Mrs. Obama was trying to discourage people from voting for John Edwards. Excuse me. Isn't this exactly what presidential candidates -- and their spouses -- do in a campaign? That's certainly what Bill Clinton has been doing on television and on the stump. He talks up his wife's credentials and downplays everyone else's.
Nonetheless, Elizabeth Edwards got testy when a voter claimed that Michelle Obama had told his 17-year-old daughter not to support John Edwards for president because the former North Carolina senator's decision to take federal matching funds subjected him to spending caps that would hurt his chances in a general election.
"I'm surprised and disappointed in Michelle," Mrs. Edwards said at a campaign event last week.
Certainly, Elizabeth Edwards has the right to defend her husband, and Michelle Obama -- having stepped into the arena -- is fair game. But there are about a million and one ways for Mrs. Edwards to communicate her disapproval of Mrs. Obama's comments. She didn't have to say she was disappointed. It's a word best not used between equals.
When Mrs. Edwards uses that word, it sounds as if she's talking down to Mrs. Obama. Both these women are lawyers, mothers and full partners in their husband's careers. One doesn't deserve any more, or any less, respect than the other.
The same goes for the candidates themselves. Barack Obama isn't off-limits. His opponents are free to criticize him just as we should expect him to criticize them. But it's how you go about criticizing someone that defines your character. And right now, some Democrats are not coming off very well.
That's a problem for them. Democrats have much of their brand tied up in the assertion that they're more progressive than Republicans, especially on racial issues. What if enough people conclude this isn't so?
Now, with his Iowa victory, Obama is on a roll. But, of course, it's still a long way to the nomination.
However this quest turns out, his supporters will be expected to forgive and forget the way their candidate was treated and support the Democratic nominee.
They may forgive. But they shouldn't forget.


Navarrette is a San Diego Union-Tribune columnist. ruben.navarrette@uniontrib.com.

http://www.indystar.com




This ALIPAC member has posted this entity be it editorial opinion, news article, column, or web creation as information for the General Population (public) only. It is not intended as an endorsement for this candidate by this poster. Its use here has not been anticipated to be used as, or used to discredit any candidate mentioned herewith.

Billy Shaheen, suggested that Obama could be unelectable in the fall campaign if Republicans claimed that he had been a drug dealer in his youth
Where did the Bush's and Clinton's get their money and past?

Originally Posted by posylady

Billy Shaheen, suggested that Obama could be unelectable in the fall campaign if Republicans claimed that he had been a drug dealer in his youth
Where did the Bush's and Clinton's get their money and past?

LOL

We all know the story of crooked activities that got the Bush dynasty their money.........and after watching the "12" Clinton videos, we know where they got their money. To say anything about Obama and drug money is d--- hypocritical!!!!!!!!!!

I'm still euphoric after watching Obama dessecrate Hillary the other nite! He really delivered with that speech of his!!! Very impressive! Problem is...i disagree with almost everything he stands for....except CHANGE! Boy, do we need a change!

I'm still rolling on the floor in hysterical laughter when I think about Hillary, "Your candidate for Change"....standing there with Madelienne Albright, Wesley Clark, and that old tattered husband of hers!!! What was she thinking???????? She deserves to lose after that ridiculous display of stupidity!!!

For the first time, I actually think Obama will go to the finish line and knock Hillary off her throne! Things are really getting interesting now...who woulda thought it!

And, about those dirty Clinton tricks....there is no way in hell Obama could ever hold a candle to the corruption of the Clintons...both of them! He is child's play compared to them!!! Bring it on!!!

Originally Posted by AmericanMe

I'm still euphoric after watching Obama dessecrate Hillary the other nite! He really delivered with that speech of his!!! Very impressive! Problem is...i disagree with almost everything he stands for....except CHANGE! Boy, do we need a change!

I'm still rolling on the floor in hysterical laughter when I think about Hillary, "Your candidate for Change"....standing there with Madelienne Albright, Wesley Clark, and that old tattered husband of hers!!! What was she thinking???????? She deserves to lose after that ridiculous display of stupidity!!!

For the first time, I actually think Obama will go to the finish line and knock Hillary off her throne! Things are really getting interesting now...who woulda thought it!

And, about those dirty Clinton tricks....there is no way in hell Obama could ever hold a candle to the corruption of the Clintons...both of them! He is child's play compared to them!!! Bring it on!!!

You too? Shrillary and Bill looked like somebody let them out of the nursing home to attend a political rally. Your post is priceless . . . .

Obama isn't African American. He is White American with a Kenyan National Father. change got us Reagan, Clinton and Bush.
change is the only thing we are certain of getting ,be it Global warming, war, famine . I don't think anyone needs to worry about not having Change.
This century will be one wild ride for everyone involved.
change got us the 1986 amnesty ,Nafta, and Iraq .

stoptheinvasionoforegon

I know what you are saying - but actually we haven't had change - not real change.

The overall agenda of one world globalism has been marching steadily along through all manner of administrations since Nixon went to China.
We have had little diversions, but it has been moved along, helped along by every President, and every congress regardless of party.

I fear Obama will not bring change - but just more of the same. He may be the one to pound the last nail in the coffin of American sovereignty. I've thought PRes Bush would - but maybe Obama has been annointed to do that.