Obama's Gary Hart blunder?

I have to say Frank...you are digging deep to equate "toxic waste" to a question about voters being "bitter". If you think people aren't bitter...read these posts.

Barack was telling the truth about some small towns.
I'd rather be in the rougher parts of Chicago then live in a town with a bunch of Jerry White's.

Its 3:00am and Hillary is under your bed!
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/D/1/2/3_am_monster.jpg

The Next President
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/W/0/2/campain_08.jpg

Your Choice!

For Change Vote Obama!
Small Town
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eDkAG3R0h8

Radio Nowhere
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmLt6kcZ72Q

Obama 08!

LOL.

Please.

The only way to make this race interesting is to beat on Obama for something his minister said and now something that he said that isn't even remotely controversial.

It's a fact that pews are filled in troubled-times. And when the smoke clears, the amounts dropping into the coffers are less.

It's a fact that gun sales go up when times are tough. And when times are good, people turn in their guns to "give back" programs for cash.

That may not mean people are exactly "bitter," but there's certainly anxiety that is related to bad times.

As for Obama being elitist: please.

Anyone who is in the reigning political class is part of an ELITE group.

Indeed, the 70% of Americans that supported the war are elitist for thinking that they knew best how Iraq should be run.

So put your big boy and girl pants on, America, and let's move on to real issues. And if that sounds condescending, that's because you deserve to be treated like a child when you act like one.

Is the remark that there are more and more people be bitter with washington a blunder? Yes for all washington politicians.

"The reason (George H. W. Bush's tactic) works so well now is that you have all these economically insecure white people who are scared to death," Clinton was quoted saying by the Los Angeles Times in September 1991.

The fact that Obama's response to the Clinton campaign saying he was wrong was essentially "I regret that you uneducated bitter ingrates were offended that I was right" will keep this story alive and unless he can appear sincerely sorry for his insult to most of the people of Pennsylvania this will push Clinton to a huge win there and might even put North Carolina back on the board. There's a lot of church-going, hunting, "bitter" people in Indiana, too.

I think that anyone who lives in a town where there is a wide scale loss of jobs - people will be bitter and angry and anxious about their future.

And we as a poeple tend to hold onto to things which we find comfort in or from which gives us strength in hard times - such as - our religious beliefs and traditions (whatever they may be).

That I think is true.

However, I think Barack Obama did mispeak in the way it was said - it can be easily miscontrued and easily used against him. However, I don't think he intended to condescend or be elitist.

I think if we compare Obama's background to that of Clinton or McCain - he will be found to be the least elitest and way more in touch with the hardships of the everyday man.

Thanks,

Canadian onlooker.

Yet another example that this nationally unvetted candidate cannot be the top of our ticket. HRC is NOT the enemy.
What’s wrong with waiting 8 years, Obama and Gobamas? Wait for LBJ’s 3rd generation of Dixiecrats to kick the bucket.
I used to say that. And I may say that again.
But, give a listen to the audio posted by Mayhill Fowler (the not so pretty girl recently on the bus who savvily recorded the disturbing speech in California).
It’s a disturbing speech and shaking a ‘you are naughty’ finger at Hilary Clinton will not work.
In fact, the whole strategy for ‘dealing’ with his comment disturbs me even more.
Because, there seems to be a pattern emerging from not just the Obama campaign, but form the lips of Obama himself:
Exclude from the ‘movement’ or otherwise silence the non-enthusiastic or
‘offending’ middle aged white or elderly women.
Listen to the audio Mayhill recorded—and be sure to thank her and show your support for her. She will need it, if Tavis Smiley is any example of how people non-conforming to the Obama message of ‘hope’ get treated.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-exclusive-audio-on_b_96333.html
His comments to the crowd that we need ‘new people’ in the Democratic party kind of chilled me to the bone. I find him very intolerant. I find his campaign intolerant. He responded to a question about his ability to really unite the party after such a divisive campaign by saying that “people get their feelings hurt” and they’ll be back (basically).
I don’t think that’s the case. People left his campaign because we felt it was using the wrong strategy and felt (but couldn’t quite put our finger on WHY it was fundamentally wrong-minded.
In his speech last night, in which he mentioned that ‘abstinence” and teaching appropriate behavior would be a good idea—heck—the people he BASHED last night have been speaking about this stuff for years! In fact, the Planned Parenthood crowd in Kalamazoo, Michigan (who later came to Chicago) managed to get a K-12 systematic sex education curriculum passed in the late 1970s. The JOHN BIRCH society worked to get it removed from the schools—and the Planned Parenthood clinic was actually bombed.
Would 70s style peaceful activists be part of the mature crowd Obama now wants replaced with his Gobama crowd? No. Not if he can help it.
That’s what it’s looking like to me.
Particularly when I heard Obama last night say talk about the pro-choice people he said were reluctant to infuse a “moral dimension’ into the abortion issue.
Patently false. Shame on Barack Obama.
Shame on him also for the recent clarification that in fact he DID attend a Muslim school (the public schools in Indonesia were like the community—women didn’t have to wear the veil, but…) seems like he was earlier being less than forthcoming. Even in liberal Islamic settings, women have a back of the bus status. I do NOT think Obama has been honest enough about this.
I think he’s sexist. Not just for the relentless bashing of Geraldine Ferraro, but for something really revealing in his speech last night, he ‘could not remember’ whether he’d had a conversation with his daughters about God. Well, if you’re in a 50’s throwback marriage where mommy is the main person interacting with the kids when they’re not in the expensive, enriching U of C daycare---then you perhaps are leaving a lot of that stuff to the wifey.
And perhaps that’s why Michelle (back when she let reporters cover her fund-raising) cut loose with the “ladies against women” style rant against Hilary (“How can she handle the White House when she ‘can’t manage’ her own house (sic).”)
The problem with sexism or any ‘ism’ is the elitism at its heart.
But there’s another reason why the Obamas must mature more before they’re at the top of the ticket.
They’ve let the newfound celebrity go to their heads.
Call it the ‘diva factor’.
Bonnie Raitt (you might remember she and Jackson Browne played a New Hampshire benefit for John Edwards’ superior approach—since adopted by Hilary Clinton—regarding nuclear power, greenhouse gases, and whatnot) chafed at being called a diva on a blues show last night. She said it reminded her of the old saw “Don’t look Miss Ross in the eye as she heads on stage.
Barack Obama as diva.

- - - - - - - - -

I think that anyone who lives in a town where there is a wide scale loss of jobs - people will be bitter and angry and anxious about their future.

And we as a poeple tend to hold onto to things which we find comfort in or from which gives us strength in hard times - such as - our religious beliefs and traditions (whatever they may be).

That I think is true.

However, I think Barack Obama did mispeak in the way it was said - it can be easily miscontrued and easily used against him. However, I don't think he intended to condescend or be elitist.

I think if we compare Obama's background to that of Clinton or McCain - he will be found to be the least elitest and way more in touch with the hardships of the everyday man.

Thanks,

Canadian onlooker.

That's it. Game over. Go home Obama. You blew it BIG time. Hillary has now won ! (Yes, I work for Hilliary "I did NOT have sex with THAT woman, Ms. Lewinsky !" Clinton). :)

Obama was trying to explain why he's not clicking it with a certain group over guns religion anti trade anti immigration. It makes it that much harder during instable economic times.The fact that people cling to guns more so than other times out of economic instability doesn't mean he'd still have these people won over on these issues if everything was just dandy. Might I add he never said more so than other times, nor did he leave room for all the other reasons people vote on such issues. He told a convenient half truth. I LOVE how all these super duper baby boomer liberals, applauded the guy a year ago on a graduation speech that mocked how much there's been a lot of talk in Washington about the federal deficit but he thinks there is another important deficit, empathy deficit, that we are suffering from.............only to become a victim of his own words. In his need to stick to "more important issues"- economy- his lack of putting yourself in the shoes of others broad swiped the motivations of a group of people in the process. Just because you tell a half truth doesn't make it right.

On to Gary H., while we are playing around with this idea would Rudy fit in too? I mean the comments he made about New York, like it was the city of sin he single handedly cleaned up, in front of a Southern crowd, I think it was a southern crowd anyway, came back around; it had it's own Swamp item too. I know there a plenty of other reasons he's no longer in the race but it sort of kind of seems to fit. (For the record I don't think this will cost Obama the nomination or the election.)

What a ridiculous comparison. Hart's comments seem much more inflamatory than Obama's. Unfortunately for Obama, his so-called verbal "gaffe" (which was really nothing more than some innocuous arm-chair sociology on his part) is over-covered and monumentally inflated by the sheep who run the 24-hour cable news shows. Why don't you guys cover some real stories, instead of slurping up the dreck hatched in the minds of political operatives.

Much ado about nothing! What will the next Barack flareup be, that the Senator didn't pee straight?

We're the group,
"Bitters for Barack!"

Why is none of my posts here???

Much ado about nothing! What will the next Barack flareup be, that the Senator didn't pee straight?
Posted by: RuthieM | April 14, 2008 3:07 PM

Nope. Maybe this:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-rezko-court-story,0,7957753.htmlstory

Keith Lifetime Chicago, bla bla

proper grammer:
Why ARE none of my posts here?
Well, probably because the editors thought they were silly.
It is the silly season, after all.

In America, the truth = poorly chosen words, and as we know, 'we can't handle the truth.'

Hey Bud McFarlin,
Welcome back.
We knew you would stop pouting about the new format and come back.