RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

That “inconvenient memo” [UPDATED with new CTV video]

UPDATE: Canadian commentators on CTV have a good chuckle over Barack Obama and his panderbear Bob Shrum who made comments on Obama’s behalf on Sunday’s Meet The Press. They also do some fact-telling on NAFTA.

(Uh, is Shrum a paid operative these days, or just trying out for a job?)

ORIGINAL STORY:Along with Newsday and Chicago Sun-Times news stories, the transcript of the new Clinton radio ad running in Ohio, and the rage of union leaders (all below), here’s the latest report from CTV.ca news, which broke the story last week on the “wink, wink” meeting between Obama senior economic adviser Austan Goolsbee and Canadian diplomats to signal that while Obama would talk tough on NAFTA, the Canadians shouldn’t worry because it’s just “campaign rhetoric” — with the Obama campaign’s emphatic denials (including Obama’s own flat-out false denial) obliterated by the “smoking gun” Canadian memorandum. Thanks to Hill Vet for the link:

Here’s more on the tell-tale press conference in which Obama pathetically dodged and weaved reporters’ questions, then walked out on them. The story comes from intrepid Chicago Sun-Times columnist Lynn Sweet today: “Obama talks a lot, but answers little | Senator hounded by Rezko questions“:

SAN ANTONIO — As Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) closed a combative press conference on Monday, where he was thrown seriously off message being asked about influence peddler Tony Rezko and why his campaign at first denied his economic adviser Austan Goolsbee met the Canadian consul in Chicago and talked about NAFTA, some reporters — me included — wanted him to take more questions.

“Guys,” said Obama, who is campaigning on a platform that there should be more government transparency. “I mean come on. I just answered like eight questions,” he said as he waved and left to a chorus of shouted questions.

I could see why Obama wanted to wrap it up. On the day before crucial votes in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island and Vermont that could make him the Democratic presidential nominee, Obama, for the first time in his campaign, was facing two potential landmines. … (Also read Sweet’s account of efforts to nail Obama down on his long relationship with Tony Rezko, now on trial in Chicago’s federal court for bilking taxpayers and pension funds out of millions.)

Newsday uses the “integrity” word — which is fair given Obama’s constant refrain that he’ll change “politics as usual”. Newsday also notes, that in his on-camera denial last week, “Obama appeared at best uninformed when asked why he had appeared to deny a report last week that such a meeting had taken place.”

On the eve of contests he hopes will force Hillary Rodham Clinton from the presidential race, Barack Obama faced a barrage of attacks Monday about his integrity, foremost among them whether he engaged in double-speak about his opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Much of the criticism was initiated by Clinton. But it assumed a life of its own as Obama struggled to explain why a Canadian government memo quoted one of his aides as saying Obama’s opposition to NAFTA was for political show.

He also fended off accusations he has withheld information about his relationship with real estate developer Antoin Rezko, who went on trial in Chicago Monday charged with federal corruption. [...]

Obama has made honesty and transparency a cornerstone of his campaign to change “politics as usual” in Washington. … (Read all of Newsday‘s “Obama faces tough questions on NAFTA, integrity.”)

Newsday, like the rest of the national media, is reporting the Obama press conference in San Antonio, which has clearly set off the media like no other incident involving Obama — particularly since every reporter knows that Obama has not been forthcoming, in any way, on his long association with Tony Rezko, whom famed U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald has put on trial:

Obama prompted angry cries from reporters when he insisted he had shared all “pertinent” information on his links with Rezko and complained that media requests “can go on forever.” Among other dealings, Obama in 2006 bought a strip of land from Rezko to expand his yard.

Reporters retorted that he has repeatedly failed to answer such questions as how many fundraisers Rezko held for him and who attended.

A quick search of Google News shows that there are 3,162 stories on NAFTA-gate.

The Facthub notes that “Top Obama Campaign Surrogate Still Flatly Denying NAFTA Meeting Took Place.” That would be Sen. Dick Durbin. It’s pathetic to see these “public servants” on television flat out lying to protect their candidate.

Here is the Clinton campaign’s new radio ad that is running in Ohio — which, ironically, the Obama campaign provided to Time magazine’s Mark Halperin (why?):

This is an election news update with a major news story reported by the AP. While Senator Obama has crisscrossed Ohio giving speeches attacking NAFTA, his top economic advisor was telling the Canadians that was all just political maneuvering. A newly released document from the Canadian government shows that Obama’s senior economic advisor met with the Canadian Consul General and made clear that Obama’s attack on NAFTA were just, quote, “political maneuvering,” not policy. Political maneuvering, not policy. In fact, the document shows that Obama’s advisor also assured the Canadians that these attacks against NAFTA would not continue. Obama would not want to be, quote, “fundamentally changing the agreement.” As Senator Obama was telling one story to Ohio, his campaign was telling a very different story to Canada. How will Ohioans decide whether they can believe Senator Obama’s words? We’ll find that out on election day. Paid for by Hillary Clinton for President.

Rage — from the frontlines of the struggle to keep U.S. manufacturing jobs — is warranted:

Here is the Feb. 2 article from McClatchy/Chicago Tribune to which Buffenbarger refers, “Obama’s fundraising, rhetoric collide: Union says senator did little to save jobs.

Maytag workers whose jobs were shipped to Mexico serve as consistent characters in Barack Obama’s stump speech. He employs their stories in railing against corporations that use trade pacts to replace well-paid union workers with low-cost foreign ones.

It is a ready applause line for the Illinois presidential hopeful, one that he has been reciting almost verbatim since he was a candidate for U.S. Senate in 2004, when appliance giant Maytag was in the process of shutting a refrigerator plant here, putting 1,600 people out of work.

But the union that represented most of those Galesburg workers isn’t impressed with Obama’s advocacy and has endorsed his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton. Its leaders say they wish he had done more about their members’ plight.

What rankles some is what Obama did not do even as he expressed solidarity four years ago with workers mounting a desperate fight to save their jobs.

Obama had a special connection to Maytag: Lester Crown, one of the company’s directors and biggest investors whose family, records show, has raised tens of thousands of dollars for Obama’s campaigns since 2003. But Crown says Obama never raised the fate of the Galesburg plant with him, and the billionaire industrialist insists any jawboning would have been futile. [BUT OBAMA COULD HAVE TRIED, DAMMIT.]

Aide: Didn’t know of tie

Obama’s chief political strategist, David Axelrod, said late Thursday that the senator did not know Crown sat on Maytag’s board until the Tribune noted it last September in a story about the closing of the Maytag headquarters in Newton, Iowa. … READ ALL of “Obama’s fundraising, rhetoric collide: Union says senator did little to save jobs..”

And here’s Mr. Buffenbarger’s press release on February 28:

Obama Telegraphs Pro-NAFTA Position
Thu Feb 28, 11:17 AM ET
To: POLITICAL EDITORS

Contact: Rick Sloan, IAMAW, +1-301-967-4520 (office), +1-202-297-2941 (cell)

WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) is urging all union members to take a second look at Sen. Barack Obamas (D-IL) position on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), following news reports he assured Canadas ambassador to the U.S. that his opposition to NAFTA was just campaign rhetoric.

According to a report on CTV Television Network, a senior member of Sen. Barack Obamas (D-IL) campaign staff contacted Canadas ambassador to the U.S. earlier this month and warned him that the senator would be taking strong positions against the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), but that it was only campaign rhetoric and should not be taken seriously.

I am appalled but not surprised by this report, said IAM International President Tom Buffenbarger. Working families cannot trust a candidate who telegraphs his real position to a foreign government and then dissembles in a nationally televised debate.

The full CTV report is now posted on YouTube, and provides additional details, including a statement that an Obama campaign spokesperson confirmed that contact with the U.S. ambassador had been made during the past month.

NAFTA is an incendiary issue in Ohio, where tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs have been destroyed since NAFTA was signed into law. Voters in Ohio and Texas have been deluged with Obama campaign ads suggesting he would revisit the trade pact to negotiate new environment and labor standards.

Then IAM is among the nation’s largest trade unions, representing nearly 720,000 active and retired members in manufacturing, aerospace, shipbuilding, transportation and defense-related industries. For more information, visit www.goiam.org.

SOURCE International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers

SEE ALSO, my March 3rd story below, updated with a timeline of the Obama campaign’s denials: “Obama Nailed on Nafta-gate.”

These issues matter to millions of American workers and their families. The “wink, wink” to Canadian officials is pouring salt in a deep open wound.

  • John

    What’s really outrageous, and utterly predictable, is how quickly people like Keith Olbermann swallowed the Canadian Govt’s “apology” for “instigating” this event, and then turned around and snarked on Hillary for using it. Never mind that the Obama camp spent more than two days denying the contact at all- they’ve been caught dead to rights, but that doesn’t matter, because the Canadians found someone willing to take the hit, so move along folks, nothing to see here…

    And anyone who watched Olbermann last night knows that he got the “Hillary’s moving the goal posts for Tuesday Night” memo and bleated it no less than four times in five minutes- clearly the MEDIA has moved the goal posts again and again, not Hillary- remember when New Hampshire was going to be decisive? Remember when “whoever wins the California primary can’t be denied the Democratic nomination?” Clearly the media is doing it again- it’s not enough for Hillary to win 3 of 4 states tonight, she has to win all four by HUGE MARGINS to have ANY CHANCE AT ALL! What a fricking joke.

    We all got to hear all day the BIG NEWS that TWO PROMINENT OBAMA SUPPORTERS say Hillary should get out. Wow, stop the presses!!

    And the very worst- I switched on CNN just in time to see some loser say “now the Clinton camp is saying Obama needs to win all four contests on Tuesday…” who said that? Answer: “Nobody, I just pulled that out of my ass.”

    Sorry to go off point, but this is just sickening.

  • http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

    Keith Olbermann cares solely about massaging the egos of his regular viewers by telling them what he knows that they want to hear. It is cynically exploitative.

    He further knows that to tell them anything that they don’t want to hear is too dangerous.

    How I wish I had the 2002 e-mails from him directly to me in which he mocked my opposition to the Iraq war. (That was before it dawned on him that he could get ratings by attacking the Bush administration with regularity.)

    Mr. Olbermann’s program is off my list of shows to be DVR’d nightly. And I can safely report that I miss nothing by not watching, particularly since his “interviews” of select people are not intended to illuminate but to affirm his stated positions in his long-winded “questions.”

    By the way, Larry Johnson has said here that he will no longer appear on Olbermann’s program. Well, Olbermann wouldn’t want to hear what Larry has to say anyway.

  • Ned Bulous

    Ummm. . .

    In the conference call, senior Clinton strategist Howard Wolfson seized on those facts to reshape expectations about the Democratic contest.

    “They are outspending us at least two to one in Ohio and Texas,” Wolfson said. “If they are unable to win these states it sends a very clear signal that Democrats want this campaign to continue. Obama has every advantage going into this election. If Senator Obama is in fact the de facto nominee, he ought to win all four.”

    Are you disputing that Wolfson said this? Unlike the questionable NAFTA-Gate memo, this is actually tape-recorded and Wolfson is a SENIOR ADVISOR to CLinton!

    Now show me a direct quote from Obama or one of his senior advisors which demonstrates that he’s been inconsistent with regard to NAFTA. . .

    And, BTW, if inconsistency with regard to NAFTA bothers you, you must REALLY be upset with Sen. Clinton’s opportunistic statements on the subject! Which is it? Is NAFTA good for the economy and are you proud of this part of the Clinton legacy, or do you really agree with Sen. Obama that labor and environmental standards should be included?

    All this talk from her about a “trade time-out” sounds devastating to the economy, as well as noncommital.

  • John

    Right- Dana Milbank writes a nasty, snarky column for The Washington Post Style section concerning Hillary, and you just KNOW he’ll be on Olbermann that night to repeat the same thing on TV. Joe Klein- loathes Clinton. Chuck Todd- Obamabot, hates Clinton. Jonathan Alter- need I go on?

    And these guys are Regulars. Why no Hillary supporters on Olbermann’s show? Well, I think it’s obvious, don’t you?

  • Mike Howell

    The last person Keith Olderman wants in the WH is Hillary Clinton. His carny side show act is long gone once a competent President is elected.

    Olderman’s fighting for his carreer here just like John Stewart and Bill Maher and the other comedians.

    They know Barack Obama’s a pathetic novice with nothing but gaffes ahead of him. The bigger the clown, the easier the material for the jerks. George Bush has been a constant laughfest. Who cares if people died and the economy is tanking?

    Bill Maher can only come up with “old” jokes for John McCain and PMS jokes for Hillary Clinton. Real substantial stuff from these aging comedians trying to keep the younger demographic.

    It’s a serious business that calls for a serious leader during these serious times.

    The last thing that we need is some Daley Machine liar looking to cash-in at every opportunity. God save us from the Charlatan from Chicago!

  • John

    Wolfson didn’t say that Obama needs to win all four to remain viable, he said that if Obama is the overwhelming favorite of the Democratic voters, as we are being old ad nauseum by his lapdogs in the media, these states should not even be close. And he’s right.

    Stop trying to change the subject. Hillary has said all along that NAFTA needs to be adjusted. After a great deal of bloviating, Obama has come down in exactly the same spot- it needs to be adjusted. They AGREE on NAFTA. The difference is that Obama pretended that they DIDNT agree for as long as he could- aided and abetted by the media, once again.

    Once again, you want to give Obama credit for NOT BEING AROUND when important issues were being debated. He even has a tv ad out now which gives him credit for giving a “Courageous Anti-War speech” when he was running for RE-ELECTION TO THE STATE SENATE (the ad leaves THIS part out, of course, implying he was running for the US Senate when he gave it.) Let’s all vote for the guy who wasn’t around to have a record on anything! Yay! Worked great with Buchanan and Grant, after all!

  • Ned Bulous

    Another quote from Wolfson:

    [ADMINISTRATOR: THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN EDITED OUT because it is off-topic. Use the Open Threads for off-topic items.]

  • John

    I’m waiting to see how many Obamabots start screaming about “fairness” and “letting the people decide” when the Texas machinery gives Obama more delegates than Hillary despite a popular vote margin for Hillary in the actual primary. My guess is that I wait a very, very long time.

  • Ned Bulous

    Clinton’s entire campaign has been one gaffe after another! I don’t think that any comedian will be lacking in material when she sarcastically mocks world leaders, starts crying after a meeting during which she doesn’t get her way, angrily waves her finger around saying ‘shame on you’ to the Congress, and MUCH MORE!

    Obama has far more class, better temperament, and better judgement than CLinton. Comedians will never lack material (they can always mock the Republicans in Congress!), but these guys are pulling for Obama because HE’S THE BEST CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT!

  • Mike Howell

    Bulbous Nebbish –

    Ghoulsbat says to the Canadian government’s representative:

    “Don’t worry about the stuff that comes out of Barack Obama’s mouth. It’s all just shit to get elected. Barack Obama has authorized me to tell you that he doesn’t mean any of it.”

    Analogy: The Charlatan from Chicago’s front man for his traveling tent show was trying to smooth things over with the Sheriff before they came to Ohio. But they got busted because the Canadians took notes and obviously don’t trust this double talking campaign carnival.

    And neither should you. He let his constituents freez to get a mansion from Rezko. Barack Obama is dangerous.

  • http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

    Ned, you’ve be warned before. Stay on topic, or you’re going to be on a short leash. I’ll put you on moderation. There are OPEN threads for off-topic items. I’m editing this one. Knock it out.

  • Mike Howell

    Ned Bulbous –

    Have you tried the ED drugs? Hillary Clinton should have bitch slapped his lying ass like his hateful bull of a wife does.

    Obama whines every day about Hillary being mean to him. What a sniveler. YUCK!

  • Mike Howell

    Sorry “freeze”. Barack Obama let his constiuents freeze. He couldn’t care less about the people.

  • Ned Bulous

    Umm. . .

    Obama has netted 10,300,410 votes so far, while Clinton has netted 9,375,213. Even if you include MI and FL (which isn’t fair, since they violated party rules and Obama’s name wasn’t on the MI ballot), Obama still is ahead by a half-million votes!

    So, he not only has 162 more delegates that Clinton, he also has nearly one million more votes!

  • Ned Bulous

    Oh, and the delegate system has been in place in TX for TWO YEARS NOW! It’s a bit like the electorate college system. . . we might not always view it as ‘fair’ (like in the 2000 elections where Gore had 1/2 million more votes, but lost the election), but those are the rules of the game and you can’t change them once the game is in play!

  • John

    And if you remove the “Democrat for a Day” (McCain’s in November) and White Independent Males for Obama (McCain’s in November) and you add to Hillary’s total all of the elderly, active service military, nurses, doctors, teachers, etc. who were disenfranchised by the caucus system, how many votes is Obama ahead after that?

    And you want to stop counting before Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania- and I don’t blame you.

  • John

    OH and the Republicans who crossed over to vote for Obama (McCain’s in November.)

    If Obama wins the nomination, it will be due to a rigged system which allowed non-Democrats to choose our nominee, plus a fawning media. Period.

  • Ned Bulous

    The only one I’ve seen whining is Clinton (and now Mark Penn “Poor me, I had nothing to do with this botched campaign even though I took 10 million dollars from them!”)

    I’ve seen no fake outrage (‘shame on you’), crying (‘we have to make the right choice’), sarcasm (‘the clouds will open’), etc from the Obama camp.

    I think you just object to him calling Clinton out on her lies, but he has always done so in a respectful, dignified way. . . while she has lost any sense of dignity she ever had!

  • John

    Oh and I love the way Obama supporters jump into defense of “the rules” whenever they seem to aid their candidate. The Superdelegates have been part of The Rules for decades now, but until recently (when it’s become more likely they will go to Obama) the Obama supporters couldnt stop bitching about how unfair they were. Now, of course, Superdelegates are Just Fine. Until they begin to break for Hillary again. Then they are Undemocratic. Give me a break.

  • Ned Bulous

    My response was on the topic of how Clinton expects to pull this nomination off, which is referenced in the initial comment by John:

    ‘Clearly the media is doing it again- it’s not enough for Hillary to win 3 of 4 states tonight, she has to win all four by HUGE MARGINS to have ANY CHANCE AT ALL! What a fricking joke. ‘

    Just because you don’t have an answer as to how one can realistically expect her to win the nomination, doesn’t mean that you should delete my post.

    I’ve noticed that Clinton supporters seem to be able to post whatever they want around here (on OR off-topic, and some of the most insulting and offensive drivel against Obama), while Obama supporters are kept on a ‘short leash’. . .

  • Frostback

    Olbermann has never permitted opposing POVs on his show.

  • Mike Howell

    Bulbous Nebbish –

    You mean the 1%’s economy! Got it. Hillary Clinton specifically said that foreign companies should be made to account for their workers treatment and salaries as well as the environmental impact of their manufacturing, so she would immediately re-visit NAFTA to ensure that there is a level playing field for the U.S.

    The time-out was for the U.S. to discontinue treating trading partners equally when they aren’t behaving equitably.

    Your Charlatan from Chicago has been trying to steal her policy, but he’s having a difficult time figuring out whether to use the fake MLK or JFK accent when he does so. The programming is still a messed up, so he stumbles over the words like Bush does when he’s lying.

  • Ned Bulous

    Obama’s going to win tonight and Hillary will have no viable path to the nomination. You can try to change the rules mid-game, but these rules have ALWAYS been in place. . . In fact, the caucus system was SUPPOSED to favor the party loyalists (who were at one point a shoe-in for Hillary) Since Obama is bringing all the new party activists into the system, generating the most enthusiasm, drawing the biggest crowds, generating the most donations (from small donors, unlike the lobbyist-financed Clinton and McCain camps) AND getting the most votes. . . shouldn’t he be the nominee?

  • ChrisXP

    Ah, but the game isn’t winning 4 states, Ned. The game is staying until June, especially since the marred finish on the O-Bomba express, will be tooooo juicy even for the cannibal press to ignore.

    Smart voters will want Hillary to continue, because if O-Bomba train wrecks, Dems will still have a viable nominee. That can’t happen if she quits today.

    Patience is a v-e-r-y good virtue. :)

    Welcome to real politics, Ned. :D

  • Ned Bulous

    BS. . . In fact, Rush Limbaugh is encouraging his listeners to cross over and vote for Clinton! But I’m not whining about it. . .

    Geez, it’s SO dishonest to want to change rules which were agreed to YEARS AGO and to WHINE INCESSANTLY because your candidate isn’t ‘winning’ according to these mutually agreed-upon rules!

    Face it, Hillary’s campaign has been abysmal- even Penn is distancing himself from it. They had NO PLAN after Super-Tuesday, when they thought the primary season would be over. They only focused on the ‘big’ states, but neglected to build a 50-state strategy, which they always despised and is the ONLY WAY to elect more down-ticket candidates. With Obama at the head of the ticket, Democrats will do FAR BETTER in November than with Hillary at the top of the ticket!

  • mimi

    “Obama has far more class, better temperament, and better judgement than CLinton. “

    Apparently you didn’t see the testy press conference where he stuttered, stammered and said “uh” a lot. Something he does quite often when he doesn’t have his trusty teleprompter. I’m sure foreign dignitaries will be impressed with that. Just like the Europeans are impressed with all of his trips to their continent….. NOT! He hasn’t made one! Just like he hasn’t held one meeting as sub-committee Chair for Foreign Relations. What indeed should our poor Allies think about that?

    But he has shown great judgement in keeping his caucasian grandmother sequestered while he shored up the AA vote. No point in needlessly reminding blacks that he has no sociological or cultural connection with us. Just ride the coattails of all of my ancestors who came here in slave ships and had to endure slavery and all that came with it. He’s cleverly pulled this slight-of-hand all the while maneuvering to avoid being associated with any distinctly black American issues. He’s promised us NOTHING! And yes, the AA community, like the MSM, has let him get away with it. Sadly, AAs are emotionally vulnerable to the desire to see what they perceive to be a ‘black’ person as president. And given our history, it’s understandable. What’s the MSM’s excuse? And what, prey tell is the excuse of all you ‘liberal white’ people suddenly looking beyond color to support an ostentatiously unqualified, inexperienced, and morally questionable candidate for POTUS?????

    Everything he’s proclaimed to be is A LIE? I notice you can’t even say with a straight face that Obama is the ‘change’ and ‘hope’ candidate anymore. How quickly the narrative has changed. It’s now Obama is no worse a politician than Hilllary or McCain. Oh really? ‘The Second-Coming?’ That you can’t even see the pure contradiction of this is patently absurd. Instead, you want to get into a pissing war over Obama creds as a ‘business-as-usual’ politician. You should really think twice about that. Because when we start assessing real credentials, your candidate ain’t even on the radar.

  • grannyhelen

    First Krugman, then Nicholson, and now…

    …Canada!

    I think this sums it up:

  • grannyhelen
  • Ned Bulous

    I never whined about Superdelegates. . . I always knew that they would not overturn the will of the people unless there was a DAMN GOOD REASON (a scandal or the like which would doom our chances in November). In fact, I think most SDs have conducted themselves well. If you’re going to have SDs, they should be trusted to do what’s best for the party.

    Nope, no whining here.

    But I think you’re off-topic! Watch out for Susan!

  • Mike Howell

    Bulbous Nebbish –

    The Charlatan from Chicago got busted by the memo! He’s lying again!

    Barack Obama’s strongest supporter and sometime homey Tony Rezko’s corruption trial continues today!

    At first, the Charlatan said he hardly knew him.

    Then on George Stephanopoulas Obama says they’ve been buddies for 20 years!

    And last week revealed them touring a mansion that Rezko’s wife managed to purchase at full price even though she makes $37 thousand dollars and has even less in assets.

    Lucky for Rezko and Obama that convicted Iraqi billionaire Nadir Auchi had just Rezko millions of dollars.

    The Charlatan got his mansion, the people got no heat in February in Rezko’s buildings.

    The Charlatan from Chicago thinks it’s all about whether you believe him or your lying eyes.

  • ChrisXP

    Clinton’s entire campaign has been one gaffe after another!

    Oh, how whiny you are, Ned.

    Male menopause hit ya????

  • Blue State Girl

    What Ned fails to answer is how he expects Obama to pull it off.

    He’s outspending Hillary a gazillion-to-1, and the polling has them separated by a few percentage points. He should be doing far better than he is–and he’s not. I don’t care that he’s won the past 11 primaries, but he hasn’t been able to finish her off.

    If he can’t close the deal, how would Ned and the Obamaphiles expect him to win the general election?

  • Simon

    Good for Larry.

    And deep down, I think Olbermann knows something is wrong, and he is uncomfortable.

  • PMS

    At this late date (following the GOP’s “Vote Obama” campaign), Rush is just doing his part to make sure all the Obamamaniacs vote today. Make no mistake about who the GOP “hopes” to see in November.

  • Simon

    Guys,” said Obama, who is campaigning on a platform that there should be more government transparency. “I mean come on. I just answered like eight questions,” he said as he waved and left to a chorus of shouted questions.

    If he’s running away from these questions now, clearly unaboe to handle the press, what’s it going to be like when he is actually accountable?

    Will he pull a Bush, with carefully orchestrated press conferences, with pre chosen questions?

    Eight questions, and he’s rattled?

    Does he KNOW what work even is? How will handle Iraq? Ask for weekends off?

    “DO we HAVE to talk about the war, today?”

    Good God, Obamabots are so naive they think this idiot is qualified, the country runs itself, the Presidency is “cool?”

    Ouch.

  • Simon

    Susan, have you put me on moderation?

    Or have I been banned?

  • Blunt Force Trauma

    Hey? Whud we do, eh?

  • Mel

    I am actually flabbergasted by the Clinton machine for allowing Obama such an easy walk from this forey!

    But after seeing how the DNP allowed Obama to twist things and blame the Clinton’s basically after NH’s loss and before SC even though it was Camp Obama who was behind it, as evident by the memo on introducing the race card against the Clinton’s, nothing anymore suprises me!

    Now we are also being fooled into everyone including the media saying Clinton must get out if she doesn’t win today is rediculous again! Thankfully the Gov of Fla said no to Caucus’s and willing to hold another Pimary in April is not what the DNP wanted to hear at all! Fla being the 4th largest State, should hold somewhere in the area of 225+ delegates and should Michigan follow suit, another 160+ delegates! But logic isn’t playing into the DNP this year, they want Obama and should simply come out and say so!

    From SD’s being threatened such as the likes of Lewis and others who have come out on being so, goes unreported to the extreme that it should!

    America is in Iraq stating that the reason is freedom, yet in America today we see Freedom disguised in the format derived in Russia last week-end where the chosen one will gain all the attention and the best candidate is pushed into the corner! Thus America needs to stop claiming the offer of freedom around the world when at home the practice is completely the opposite!

    Reality is, had all these occurances with Obama been on any other candidate, McCain of Clinton, they would have been massacured by the media and forced out! This election campaign will forever destroy the Democtatic Party and even worse, it will destroy America and its respect in the world, because the world is watching and the majority of the world press reporting at present is wondering why America acts so blindly! Even Hillary, should she not be the nominee, says afterwards the Democratic Party will unite, this is wishful thinking, as the actions of the campaign season has done damage to the core of the Democratic Party!

    This is the Karl Rove playbook at its finest being played out in American politics!

  • Salo

    One of the things that really give me pause about Obama are the fans like Inland and Nevadadem over at Dkos. I got accused of being prowar a number of times by them, but their fanaticism about being 100% antiwar strikes me as being newly minted because it is so adamant (like a neocon). If about the memos Olbermann suffers from to same sort of cranky new found opposition to the war.

    It always surprised me in the debates when Russert and Tweety and Wolf would chastize Democratic pols for voting yeah on the IWR, given the pressure the media brought to bear to get the war on.

    It’s like they are attempting to erase their culpability for the war policy by slyly blaming Dems for it when we know it was essentially Bush and the republicans who carried it all out. They don;t chastise mccain for supporting the war still the way they attacked Edwards or clinton for their yeah votes.

  • rjj

    This is the Karl Rove playbook at its finest being played out in American politics!

    The Obama candidacy is a maneuver in the permanent majority campaign.

  • jwrjr

    Clinton must get out of the race when Obama has more than enough delegates to guarantee the nomination … and not one second earlier. To borrow an old saying, being called divisive by an Obot is rather like being called ugly by a frog.

  • apishapa

    Let’s see:

    Day one: No, sir, it never happened

    Day two: No, sir, it never happened, but even if it did, it wasn’t like that.

    Day three: Well, if there was a meeting it wasn’t about NAFTA and we never discussed policy. But we do not agree that there ever was a meeting.

    Day four: Well, maybe Goolsbee ran into a guy from the embassy on accident, but it was off the record and not about policy. And we do not agree that any such meeting ever took place.

    Day five (memo leaks): Well, we still do not acknowledge the meeting ever happened, but if it did you mischaracterized it and it is all the media’s fault for leaking.

    Obama is already famous for “borrowing” speeches from Democrats, now he is stealing George Bush’s talking points.

  • http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

    No way. It was a spam filter glitch. (If that happens to any of the rest of you, e-mail me.)

  • http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

    Boo hoo. It’s rough being a follower.

  • http://DeeLee David Gallagher

    Contrary to Obamas speeches about Clintons vote for the war, and trying to make it sound as though she declared war single handedly, Senate Joint Resolution 45, which authorized Bush to use military force as a last resort only, was passed in the house with 97 yeas, 1, nay and 4 no-votes. According to Obama only he and Sen. Byrd (nay)got it right.

    BTW kennedy and Kerry also voted yea. But wait, he wasn’t even a Senator at the time and by his own admission wasn’t privy to all the information that the senate had to form their opinions, therefore, his arguement is one heck of a stretch at best.

  • grannyhelen

    Look for the Obama campaign to start doing oppo…on Canada! That jelly donut eating, Molson beer drinking, hockey watching place with the “red” leaf (and why “red” – the color favored by the USSR? Shall we call the leaf the new hammer and sickle?)

    If Obama loses, it will All Be Canada’s fault!

    tee hee! Just funnin’ with ya…

  • mimi

    That’s correct. The Dems have been punk’d! Again.

    Btw, it was Donna Brazile who stirred up the idea that she would quit the Democratic Party if the SDs decided the nom. And the Obama camp concurred. Then, behind the scenes the pressure was ON. Jesse Jackson, Jr. strong arming AA SD members of the CBC like John Lewis. They pushed hard the Obama Movement theme as he packed in stadiums of converts with his ‘change’ and ‘hope’ message’ that trumped experience. Experience=’old style politics.’ Obama represented ‘new.’

    Obama has been EXPOSED! How, pray tell, is he going to unite the party and bring in Hillary’s supporters now that he can’t use his message of ‘change’ and ‘hope?’ I guess we’re supposed to HOPE that Obama is less of a regular old style politician than McCain. I guess that’s the CHANGE they were talking about. In the meantime, the DNP now has egg on their face. As more and more info on Obama trickles to the surface Howard Dean is going to wish he had stepped in and emphatically condemned any strong arm tactics and assert that SDs would of course go along with the will of the people. Maybe if he had been a wise leader, Hillary may have bowed out by now and her supporters would have joined the ‘movement.’

    Now, no way am I going to accept the less experienced candidate whose inpirational campaign was not just a lie, but cloned from a so-far so-so recently elected governor whose having his own problems governing in Massachussetts. Not a good impetus to vote for the less qualified candidate.

  • Lorelynn

    I guess he shouldn’t have taken his name off the ballot. That little snit didn’t work out so well for him, did it? Now, he wants do-overs?

    What a bunch of babies.

  • Lorelynn

    Well, he isn’t getting the most votes from Democrats, unfortunately. He’s got a whole lot of Pubs voting for him because they’re afraid to face Hillary in the general election. Ultimately, he doesn’t have much credibility as a Democratic candidate. He’s in favor of disenfranchising millions of votes in two large, blue states that we need in November and the voters in at least one of those states he would disenfranchise because of actions taken by the GOP. Why would a Democrat do that? And he took his own name off the ballot as a Democratic candidate in the other. Hmmmmmmmm

    I just don’t think the guy is a Democrat. He certainly isn’t running a Democratic campaign what with inviting homophobic bigots on stage and using so much misogynist rhetoric. Add to that his embrace of GOP talking points on social security and healthcare, and it’s hard to make the case that he is, in fact, a Democrat.

  • ChrisXP

    If O-Bomba can’t strike out Hillary now, Hillary will walk to the convention.

    Low on money; bickering staff; media hates her – http://mediamatters.org/items/200712310001 – and McCain’s hasn’t even threw a curveball O-Bomba’s way — if O-Bomba can’t win over that mess, he can’t win over the GOP, period.

    It’s really “do or die” for O-Bomba. All Hillary has to do is ride his train, and walk off before it chugs off the cliff.

    The Clintons’ aren’t fools at politicking. :)

  • IndyRobin

    Keith Obama-Man broke my heart. I feel sick to my stomach … I am serious, when I hear his hillaryHating rants. I ‘disapeared” him weeks ago

    With that said has anybody heard about this

    It is being reported by Halperin that 50 SuperDel’s are coming out TODay to support BO.
    How TF can they be so OBVIOUS. Trying not to be bummed

  • Frostback

    Mike Duffy is not to be messed with. Trust.

    His laughing at the absurdity of Shrum’s allegation will resonate here.

    Methinks Obama doesn’t quite grasp Canadian politics and media.

  • Frostback

    It’s one tricky dance to condemn someone in your own party for a vote of this magnitude while wrapping your arms around several others who did exactly the same thing.

    How do Obama and his supporters reconcile that?

  • Andy

    They don’t : they are certified blind.

  • Mel

    Here is the link to the latest polls:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/lates...

    And here are some good poll results:

    RCP TX average: Clinton +1.7
    RCP OH average: Clinton +7.1

    TX Reuters/CSpan/Zogby Clinton +3

    OH Reuters/CSpan/Zogby Tie

    TX WFAA/Belo Tracking Clinton +1

    OH Ohio Poll/Univ of Cin. Clinton +9

    General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen (Mon) McCain 47, Clinton 44, Und 9 McCain +3

    General Election: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen (Mon) McCain 47, Obama 42, Und 11 McCain +5

    OH Rasmussen Clinton +6

    TX Rasmussen Obama +1

    TX InsiderAdvantage Clinton +5

    OH Suffolk Clinton +12

    OH PPP Clinton +9

    TX PPP Clinton +6

    OH SurveyUSA Clinton +10

    OH Quinnipiac Clinton +4

    RI Brown University Clinton +5

    General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen (Mon) McCain 47, Clinton 44, Und 9 McCain +3

    General Election: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen (Mon) McCain 47, Obama 42, Und 11 McCain +5

    What???? McCain 47, Obama 42 where are all those crossover Republicans, where are all those Independants! What more proof is needed that the Hope is a Joke?

  • Andy

    Wow, Mel, the change in the GE match-ups with McCain are striking!!

    Wonder why is nowhere to be found in the MSM….
    (need to think some about that..)

  • lemonv

    I found this on Slate. It is a delegate counter in which you can input in virtually any scenario in order to get the total pledged delegates.

    Here is the link:
    http://www.slate.com/features/delegatecounter/

    What was found by me is that if Sen. Clinton wins by about 60% those states that have pledged delegates in the 20s above(8 remaining states in all out of 16), she could overtake Obamas’ lead in pledged delegates.

  • rwc

    IMO the Obama and his crew are using his popularity to blackmail the Democratic party establishment to support them.

    All Obama has to do is tell Dean that if he doesn’t back him, the AA vote will stay home along with the latte liberals in Nov which means a massive defeat for the Democrats.

    Its blackmail and identity politics all wrapped up in one ugly package.

  • mostest

    Ahh Yeah! What mimi said.

  • lemonv

    Hey, Ned.

    Am just wondering what you would do if Sen. Clinton won Texas and Ohio today. And she winds up ahead of the pledged delegates at the convention. Would you be willing to put your support behind her?

    I doubt it.

  • Gloria

    I turned him off, too….once he signed his multi-million dollar deal, I got the feeling he would be more willing to be owned….and, I think, he has compromised himself completely by becoming so biased…

  • Gloria

    If he has to beg reporters to lay off questionning him, then he DOES NOT have the guts or temperatment to be President! Bush has done the same thing…either gets testy or hides….and we know how THAT has turned out…

  • http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/03/04/angry-obama-hit-by-ohio-mailer/ “Angry Obama” Hit by Ohio Mailer : NO QUARTER

    [...] the worm is turning across the national media. Besides the Newsday and the Chicago Sun-Times stories cited below, there’s the NY Daily News story today is “Angry Barack Obama bombarded by [...]

  • It’sNotMe

    WOW! Buffenbarger’s speech is one of THE BEST speeches I’ve seen in this race! That was fantastic! FINALLY, the TRUTH about Mr. Hope is seeing the light of day. Hillary is going to win this nomination. I FEEL it. Once the light shines on Mr. Hope, he’s finished.

  • Joey

    Whatever your reasons to ignore Olberman (questionable motivations, disguised interviews etc.) Keith has called Bush a fascist and a liar on national tv. He called out Rumsfeld and Cheney and many other neocons when no one else was doing it. No matter the reason for doing so, no one else was voicing loudly the rage against these people. His special comments were greatly appreciated, especially at times when no one else would come out and say it. He put these people in their place and let Americans see them for the snakes they are. I hope he continues for a long time to come to make such remarks. He has a point and a place that boosts our side of the coin despite his other “failures” and much good has and does come from him. Like all other media one must be discriminate of the message but Olbermann boldly attacks the president and his disastrous administration when the rest of the media kisses his …just saying…good on ‘em.

blog comments powered by Disqus