“The Ever-Malleable Mr. Obama”
By SusanUnPC on June 28, 2008 at 11:55 AM in Barack Obama, Bill Ayers, Bolshevikization, Campaign Financing, FISA, Iran, MSNBC, Media Bias, Obamatopia, Obamedia
On MSNBC yesterday, Republican Michael Smerconish, a Philly talk show host, brought up Charles Krauthammer’s latest Washington Post op-ed, and Flineo captured the video.
Smerconish actually says he’s thinking about voting for Obama? Does MSNBC now add a clause to its contracts that its hosts must appear inclined, ideally prostrate, before the Messiah?
Flineo has thoughtfully provided the audio text. Now, here’s a must-read section of Krauthammer’s op-ed. (Yes, yes, yes, I’ll provide the usual mandatory, it seems, caveat that we know that Dr. Krauthammer is a conservative and a neo-con, but he’s astute and he’s got Obama pegged.)
The last sentence of this quote from Krauthammer’s op-ed is especially important to read:
Normally, flip-flopping presidential candidates have to worry about the press. Not Obama. After all, this is a press corps that heard his grandiloquent Philadelphia speech — designed to rationalize why “I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can disown my white grandmother” — then wiped away a tear and hailed him as the second coming of Abraham Lincoln. Three months later, with Wright disowned, grandma embraced and the great “race speech” now inoperative, not a word of reconsideration is heard from his media acolytes.
Worry about the press? His FISA flip-flop elicited a few grumbles from lefty bloggers, but hardly a murmur from the mainstream press. Remember his pledge to stick to public financing? Now flush with cash, he is the first general-election candidate since Watergate to opt out. Some goo-goo clean-government types chided him, but the mainstream editorialists who for years had been railing against private financing as hopelessly corrupt and corrupting evinced only the mildest of disappointment.
Indeed, the New York Times expressed a sympathetic understanding of Obama’s about-face by buying his preposterous claim that it was a preemptive attack on McCain’s 527 independent expenditure groups — notwithstanding the fact that (a) as Politico’s Jonathan Martin notes, “there are no serious anti-Obama 527s in existence nor are there any immediate plans to create such a group” and (b) the only independent ad of any consequence now running in the entire country is an AFSCME-MoveOn.org co-production savaging McCain.
True, Obama’s U-turn on public financing was not done for ideological reasons, it was done for Willie Sutton reasons: That’s where the money is. It nonetheless betrayed a principle that so many in the press claimed to hold dear.
As public financing is not a principle dear to me, I am hardly dismayed by Obama’s abandonment of it. Nor am I disappointed in the least by his other calculated and cynical repositionings. I have never had any illusions about Obama. I merely note with amazement that his media swooners seem to accept his every policy reversal with an equanimity unseen since the Daily Worker would change the party line overnight — switching sides in World War II, for example — whenever the wind from Moscow changed direction.
Bill Ayers and Mike Klonsky must be chuckling about that comparison.
_________
Read all of Dr. Krauthammer’s op-ed, which also gets into Obama’s two-faced positions on NAFTA, Iran, and more.
Unlike “authoritarian leftists” — a term coined by law professor Steve Diamond in his Juen 26th article here, “‘White Guilt’ Politics of Obama Crowd Undermined” — I believe in reading and listening to the viewpoints of ALL bright political observers.
The “authoritarian leftists” at Daily Kos and simlarly hardcore leftist blogs deem any quote by Mr. Krauthammer and others like him to be verboten.
It is as if they fear that their readers may be harmed by exposure to the opinions of Dr. Krauthammer, Patrick Buchanan, and other excellent writers on the “right.”
Further — and more worrisome — they do not permit any viewpoints but their own selective set of views.
That takes me to another term, “Bolshevikization,” coined here at No Quarter by Charles Lemos in his article, “The Bolshevikization of the Democratic Party.” Here is the first paragraph:
Bolsheviks (or “the Majority”) were an organization of professional revolutionaries under a strict internal hierarchy governed by the principle of democratic centralism and quasi-military discipline, who considered themselves as a vanguard of the revolutionary proletariat. Their beliefs and practices were often referred to as Bolshevism. We can safely say that Obamaism can be equated with Bolshevism, this is nothing less than a coup led by a new caudillo, Barack Obama. For someone who professes to want to run a campaign from the bottom-up, this is the inverse. It’s centralized control from the top down. …
The hardcore leftist radicals and racists who have surrounded Barack Obama for over 20 years are all for the Bolshevikization of the Democratic party.
As are the hardcore leftists at Daily Kos who give lip service to “free speech,” but only when it comes to their free speech. Those who dare to disagree with the rigid viewpoints are swiftly, brutishly dealt with.
Meanwhile, they rationalize every flip-flop of Mr. Obama, assuming he’ll come back around if he’s victorious.
What they fail to get is that, as Dr. Krauthammer makes clear, Mr. Obama is nothing but a typical politician who’ll say anything, and shift any of his positions, to achieve his sole goal, which is winning.
But there lingers in my mind a bigger worry that, besides his being a two-faced typical politician, Mr. Obama’s longtime close associations with extreme radicals could have devastating consequences for this nation should he somehow be elected.
JUST IN FROM THE UK PRESS:
BILL CLINTON IS A PUMA!!!!!
Bill Clinton says Barack Obama must
‘kiss my ass’ for his support
http://dakiniland.wordpress.com/2008/06/28/bill-clinton-is-a-puma/
That’s not the Bill Clinton I knew.
It’s the Bill Clinton I want to know.
YOU GO BIG DAWG.
That really has made my day.
I wish they would stop saying people who don’t support ohblahma are “bitter”. The use of the word bitter implies that the problem lies with the person who is “bitter.” Could it possibly be that Bill Clinton doesn’t think hes a good candidate and doesn’t really like him or his tactics?
Bitter wasn’t such a negative word until Barack used it to describe all of middle America.
Exactly. I don’t mind being labeled that. It’s accurate. *heh
Bitter in this context is used to describe the “Taste” of the truth.
They are “bitter”.
. Sound like BO?
Care to guess where this quote is from?
If you said that
They’re not sure
what to do about a man who does
anything and everything in his
power to be elected. The media
is silenced, people are harassed, and
in a lot of cases ‘disappear’
CNN analyst this morning on Zimbabwe
Sound familiar?
They are trying to convince us that there is no rational reason to oppose Obama, and if we do, it must mean we are just racist spoilsports.
I met a guy at a teachers’ conference a few weeks ago who very offhandedly remarked that in November we’ll find out how racist America really is, because if America is NOT racist, Obama will win. If it is racist, McCain will win. He told me this without the slightest trace of irony in his voice. It was just Matter of Fact. And this guy was a PhD teaching history to impressionable minds.
Of course. But I have an entire family of academics. So that’s standard.
Here’s what I find interesting. My family of birth is actually academic back generations now. (except for me…..outcast here).
They are NOT like that.
So, apparently, if you get over the initial do-gooder stuff and truly embed yourself, you don’t lose your brains.
The new academic in the family was the ex-husband, and he made me *blink* once too often.
He’s an ex now.
There are academics and academics.
My husband and I are both university faculty and we are strong Hillary supporters and will not vote for Obama.
As I am Asian (my husband is white), we think it is very important that equal work-equal pay supplants affirmative action.
When it is affirmative action for one group, it is discrimination for another.
I have seen it over and over again in admissions (undergraduate, graduate, professional level) that quota discriminates against Asians. The university boards always have numerous reasons why that kind of discrimination is OK (hey we don’t want to fill the entire class with Asians).
Bottom line, we are not racists because we are against affirmative action. We just believe that if you work hard, have good grades, are smart, you should be given an equal shot as any other ethnic group.
Since this philosophy does not hold for the Presidency, how can there be hope for other aspects of life?
*nodding*
I really am not against all affirmative action proposals. I worked in Corporate. It is soooooooo* tied to image. Affirmative action did open the doors to the golfers. (That’s my term.)
Wow* They discovered other people have brains! LOL*
But overall, I agree.
We needed affirmative action in 1969, trouble was I think it was expanded beyond the scope of its original intention. Nixon introduced the ideas of quotas as quantitative approach, typical bureacratic response. The affirmative action would have been better managed with a more targeted approach toward institutions that woefully under representated by African Americans. Access to education though was paramount.
I agree with you. No to affirmative action,
yes to equal pay!
Obama called Bill Clinton a racist (thru his campaign) Obama can kiss my ass too!
The Obama’s have done nothing for the AA community just like Michelle Obama said the AA community will wake up they better or they will get someone with a proven track record of hurting the AA community. (RESKO) 9 out of 11 housing projects shut down (in Obama district) and OBama defended him the people where living without heat and health standards
It’s funny in every thread it always come down to race here. That’s really kind of pathetic. Let’s be clear. Bill and Hill made racist statements. Cry a river all you want, thems the facts. Millions of AA’s just aren’t that stupid OR sensitive, contrary to popular belief here at NQ. For the record for ALL of you crybaby’s out there, I’ll repeat.. a person can make racist statements without NECESSARILY being a racist. I know that’s a foreign concept to most here, but try and make that distinction in the future. Again, I don’t believe the Clintons are racist, but they did make racist statements… no doubt!
[ADMIN: We are tired of your broad-stroke nasty comments here without an iota of proof. Goodbye.]
The only reason it comes down to race is because people like you make it about race. You read to much into what people say. As if there are code words or something. Well if there are… someone forgot to give us the codes.
Us trolls make it about race?? Laughable. Just not true. Code words?? How about in another thread where one of your NQ faithful called Obama a “RE-NIGGER”. No code there that even the unabashedly stupid couldn’t understand. But hey, this is your world.. drown in it.
Yes, you are a racist. You called your self a troll.
I prefer vindictive, but bitter will do. What do these folks leaning against the wall making snide comments suggest is the an appropriate response to thuggery and election rigging, and cowardice, and piss poor judgment.
he’s just a cat in big dawg clothing!
How stupid are Bill’s “friends” that they do not understand why he is still angry? Obama did everything he could to trash Clinton’s legacy and the party leaders and mainstream media gleefully went along with it.
I cannnot forgive Obama for portraying Bill Clinton as a racist and dissing his record. Party leaders should have been screaming about Obama’s remark that both his and Reagan’s administration left people behind (he did not name Clinton but made it clear by including the 90’s). Whatever you think of Clinton personally, he was the most successful Democratic president since FDR. His legacy is proof positive that Reagonics does not work. Clinton moved record numbers of people out of poverty while our economy grew at a healthy rate and we generated a budget surplus.
Democratic leaders are beyond stupid. The Republicans made an all out push to canonize Reagan making it extremely hard to argue against Saint Ronnie’s policies. Clinton gave them the ammunition they needed and they not only refuse to use it, they have gone along with the rejection of what he accomplished. Even during the impeachment Clinton’s approval ratings were sky-high, yet these bozos willingly have turned their backs on both Clintons and willingly participated in character assasination. If Obama wins they will feel that they made the right decision.
Some things should not be forgiven. What Obama and the party did to Bill Clinton is one of them.
I agree with your factual assessment 100%.
Bingo. He’d be a fool to do so. It would be like agreeing that he was racist.
Bill should let Hillary stand on stage and enthusiastically cheer, “Yes We Can!”
Bill needs to truly retreat and let the entire season play out.
That will not approve the message of Obama. That is the ONLY way he’ll have credibility later.
He should not even bow down if Obama kisses his ass.
Besides, I don’t think Obama wants Bill anywhere arund.
He’s the “new” Democratic party, right?
They don’t need Clinton Dems. We cling to guns and religion.
(Meanwhle, the idiot is debating Dobson?)
The insanity is too much for me, anyway.
I checked out of the Democratic party around NH.
From then on, it’s been nothing but validation.
My time with that party is over.
Congratulations, Ann. I’m sure you’ll find the Republican Party very much to your liking.
RIGHT ON !!
I would like to know who are the IDIOTS that that article is quoting as “Democrats” and “Friends”. It should be obvious to anyone that WJC
thinks this way. I was especially pissed off at the comment that
they don’t understand why Clinton is being “patronizing to the nominee” EXCUSE ME???
This is GOVERNOR AND (twice) PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON !!
Next to him Obama is noone and a wannabe. Obama needs to show
TONS of respect and eat lots of crow first.
I thought the same thing. Obama is the presumptive nominee and some how a former two term president and former multiple time governor is supposed to scurry over to kiss the ring of this wannabe? What drivel!
I believe in time Big Dawg will tepidly support Obama simply because Big Dawg is a Democrat through and through. But I hope tepid is a far as it goes.
Were it me I wouldn’t be waiting for rumors from some “close” associate or whatever that just can’t keep their damn mouth shut. I’d be saying loud and clear that even kissing my ass wouldn’t get my support.
Damn, at least the Republicans have the common decency to treat their former presidents with respect. We, in our own party, trash ours. How stupid is that?
a friend understands and those can be counted on one hand. i am sure bill clinton knows who his real friends are and the idiots quoted as friends by this so called writer are not friends but simply political acquaintances. hillary is a friend of bill’s as well as his wife. that is a definition of a real marriage, you self involved foul mouthed nitwit, michelle.
very well said……. i agree.
Spot on Bernie!
Bernie 0 - What an on-target piece about Bill Clinton. So glad to see more and more people standing up for him on the blogs and on political talk shows. Yesterday it was James Carville. WJC will always be The Big Dawg.
If anybody needs reminding, it was Jackson, Jr. and Clyburn plus campaign strategists who had the “race card” plan in place and sprung it first - not in response to anything Hillary’s campagign did - but preemptively. The only way one could believe that anything Bill or Hillary said was “playing the race card” would be if one was devoid of critical thinking. Voters ought to realize by now that Obama has perfected the passive-aggressive modus. Accuse the other side of doing the very thing you’ve done, and then drop down as if under attack and play the victim to the hilt. What a guy.
Susan I agree with almost everything you say and would only add that they now are exactly what they have been screaming about! WIN AT ALL COSTS LEMMINGS
and the frown lines and pain lines are fast becoming permanent on my face after the last 8 yrs I expected some relief
I knew I had the right position! I’m on the same page as Bill!
There is no reason for GOV. and (twice) PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON to get over anything for that wannabe who trashed his legacy, insulted him personally with racist attacks and disrespected a US PRESIDENT (and hence all of us). Obama needs to eat a LOT of crow before deserving the time of day from President Clinton.
And he better call him in private and in public PRESIDENT CLINTON; not
“Bill”.
Is it possible to write an email letter to Bill? I’d like to tell him that
I support him 100%
Anyone knows how can he be reached?
http://www.clintonfoundation.org/contact.htm
Under the “Topic” pull-down menu, select “Correspondence - Write to President Clinton”.
thank you for president clintons e-mail address, just sent him one. we love bill clinton !
Love having you on the team Bill! A Dem leader who actually tells the truth about this Brat? That’s what makes him the Big Dawg! And the pundits are all shocked. Such idiocy. After using the most scurrilous tactics, Bill is supposed to just ‘get over it,’ just like women, Muslims, the working class, etc. Welcome Under the Bus Bill, the company is great!
Now that he needs them to win, Bill is supposed to kiss HIS feet? I don’t think so. Let him sink Bill.
The reasons Dems keep losing elections! It’s so clear this year. They don’t care about voters, and just toss them aside for the Republicans to pick up easily. Remember Thomas Frank’s book Whats the Matter with Kansas from 2005?
It’s especially clear to me this year, because I’m one the of ones they’re throwing away.
Harriet Christian is a great heroine and thanks to her for not going on CNN!
I just read that article…LOL. GO BILL!!
At least some journalists are holding BOs feet to the fire…I’m just amazed and bewildered that so many pundits just put the most positive spin on every BO says and does.
Talk about putting lipstick on a pig….
Why are you amazed? You are reading the label and ignoring the contents. Obviously that (aesthetician to said pig) is their job. If they didn’t do it, somebody else would.
What does “aesthetician”? Give me ONE like word that people will actually understand, come one buddy it’s not the Lowest Common Denominator, but it isn’t the Greatest either.
it is the term for makeup artists attached to plastic surgeons’ offices. As they are paid 10-50X the going rate of cosmeticians they need the loftier term. You could have derived the meaning from the root if you hadn’t spent so much energy being all pompous (that means self-important, high-and-mighty, a kind of horse’s ass).
It’s their job to puff up the empty suit, spew BO talking points and ride the old Unity Pony? It’s their job to cheer on Obama supporters and treat anyone else (PUMAs or McCain supporters) as daft and unimportant? It’s their job to assist BO in squelching and marginalizing any opposition to his “movement”?
Okey dokey.
2 more months for something to happen.
Smerconish is a kind of burly version of Michael Weenie, isn’t he.
Smerconish would rather be on television then stuck on PA radio. New era in the media, reporting the truth of ‘today’.
I want to know who’s holding the media’s leash now? I know it’s not the DNC. Which dark forces cooked this Manchurian candidate? Seems it goes beyond “let’s get rid of the Clintons” and I want to know who’s behind this.
Zeitgeistthemovie.com
NWO, Bilderberg, Bohemian Grove, NAU, Amero, etc, etc.
Who controls the world? They who control it’s debt.
My guess is that it’s the same people who put George W. Bush in office. Obama would be the same sort of figurehead in office who would obey their every command.
As BILL Clinton goes so do many Democratic voters.
I’m just your average bitter white person but even if barry kissed my ass I WOULD NOT VOTE FOR HIM EVER.
Frankly I doubt Bill and Hillary will vote for him.
I also like to think he cannot win, but the press will probably make him POTUS.
Cheaters should never win.
Wake up America… wake up
Clinton knows Obama can’t win. That was the argument the entire time Hillary stayed in the race. He’s not going to change his mind. Unlike Barack he actually has convictions.
i saw gore endorse, but i don’t see him doing anything else. i personally think he is running like hell for the nearest exit. i am willing to bet any veep worth having is running also. the wannabes are standing in line however and obama can have his pick of them. uh!
Bill Clinton will NOT vote for Obama: bet on it; and neither will Chelsea or HRC.
They’ll write in HRC’s name if that’s allowed in NY.
Well, it’s their business who they vote for, but it would be hilarious if the Clintons all snub Obama in the voting booth.
The largest part of the party, the democratic opposition just keeps growing: 25% won’t vote for Zer0!
http://www.nobamanetwork.com/
61 percent of No Quarter Posters
The ones that took this THIS local POLL admit to being Dems 4 Hillary NOW voting for McCain!!
That’s HUGE!
I cannot believe that the 4th estate has deserted us like this.
This is not the country I thought I lived in. Where are the responsible journalists. How do these people look at themselves in the morning knowing they are whoring themselves out instead of doing their jobs.
As to the Bill Clinton article in the UK Telegraph –someone mentioned above, I don’t like the tenor of the article saying he should just “get over it” — Obama basically had his surrogates call a successful two term President –who has done more for this country and the world than the arrogant empty suit Obama could ever dream of doing — a racist, and did his best to tarnish the man’s legacy.
Obama is not fit to be dog catcher, never mind Commander in Chief.
Don’t worry, President Clinton, I’m not getting over it, either.
Your faith in the press was misplaced.
Spanish American War.
Well, I can’t say I ever had faith in the press to that extent — but this is thoroughly ridiculous.
It was thoroughly ridiculous back when they were touting Bush over Gore and Bush over Kerry and were parroting without the slightest criticism all of Bush’s lies about why he should invade Iraq. The fact that they continue to be in the tank for Obama just tells me my decision to vote for McCain is correct.
If nothing else gives ya pause, the press has been right about absolutely nothing for years. They lie and spin and distort and when time proves them wrong they don’t even bother, for the most part, to say so much as oops. The blood of every person killed in Iraq is on the hands of the media as much as Bush and Cheney.
Media chooses our candidates and then trashes the ones they don’t like and deify the ones they decide should win.
Thus and so; rule of thumb in the eye, if they are fer it, we should consider being agin it.
Read Bob Somerby at the Daily Howler and you’ll get a real good look at your moronic media in action.
lol*…..exactly. If ever there was a bunch who has NOT earned credibility, it’s some of these pundits.
They were fired in the last round of mergers.
Trust me.
That’s the problem today with the press.
We went from feast to famine.
And we, dear people, are part of that.
We stopped buying and reading newspapers.
That was where investigative journalism lived. Heaven’s, everyone knew the TV guys were always more entertainers than journalists.
It was the newspapers that were the mainstay of real news.
And we stopped delivery because we don’t read that much anymore.
Ads stopped running, therefore.
And the industry has been decimated.
Now, in LA? This is not a bad thing. LOL* (Sorry, taking a poke here at the LA TIMES, which is horrible about running 5 pages of a story that just goes on and on and on and on.)
Apparently, the Chicago Trib, which I am not familiar with, has the same issue. That Rezko story is not even a good spy novel it’s so complex and hard to follow. I end up and don’t give a rat’s ass. Just don’t make me read another story about Rezko that is chalk-full of names I don’t know and relationships I can’t track! I’d rather read British History!”
So we’re responsible.
Point the finger at yourself.
Hey, back off British history–it’s the bomb!
I read the Washington Post for twenty-five years, religiously. This year, that newspaper became the clearinghouse for every snarky, nasty troll who wanted to publish an Anti-Hillary screed on the Op-Ed or Editorial page. It’s Style Section became dominated by “here’s why Hillary sucks on television and Oh My God Did You See What She Wore At that Debate Last Night?” nonsense. The Front Section used thousands of gallons of ink telling me that the Florida and Michigan primaries didn’t count and no matter how big a margin Hillary won by, it “didnt impact the inevitable outcome” and Hillary should just quit already.
I don’t feel guilty that I am no longer giving this rag my fifty cents per day. If it folds, it’s not my fault. I didn’t turn this paper into the Obama is Wonderful, Hillary Sucks Times.
The editors of the Post can look in the mirror for the answer when they wonder why their readership is down. I’m not required to buy “news” because it’s printed on paper, even if it isn’t fit to line bird cages.
I hear ya……I’m a newspaper reader, too, but I won’t spend a dime.
LOL*
But my point still stands.
It’s an industry issue.
Here’s the latest from the LA TIMES. I heard the guy recently on a talk show who is transforming the Times into an on-line whiz-bang deal.
Obama announced that he was working with this group.
OK, so he’s talking, and I’m listening, and I’m thinking, “Smart move,”
and then he reveals that one detail that really clarifies just how out of touch they are. He said, you ready?
We’re making sure that people can skim just by the quotes that are boldface.
Now, excuse me, he’s talking about pull-quotes.
That’s a magazine style technique that has been around for decades. As a corporate writer, I just do those in my sleep.
This is the new and improved LA TIMES?
Omigod……they are dead ducks.
I simply couldn’t believe it.
So, look for all newspapers to be out of business in 10 years.
They are dead.
I am sure internet will be the next frontier.
I am not sure advertising is the way to go.
I’m thinking it may be paid, but high-quality, internet sites.
And that will cut into cable, too. Who needs them?
The cable companies are boring. Same channels, times 2….
Quality could be the next real frontier.
But then, blogs have to transform from being opinion pieces to real journalism. And that takes some investment.
We’ll see how it goes.
I wonder what the net energy use is to produce the newsprint, publish, and distribute a paper versus reading on line.
But some people are going to have to choose between internet and heating. Computers don’t work so good at 50 degrees.
i got talked into taking my local paper. most of the stuff in it i can get on the net faster and more reliable. it just creates more trash than i want. sad to say for sure. you can bet that if i were getting real news, good editorials and hard hitting, i’d be first in line to get the paper.
Why are people supposed to “get over” this racist -anti american - know nothing , who has shown nothing but bad behavior since the beginning of his politcal career?
The only one “getting over” is obama “getting over” on the American people.
There has never been a doubt that President Clinton and Senator Clinton both love this country and want the best for it.
What about obama? What has he done at any time to make anything better for anybody but himself.
COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY
PUMA
Eugene Robinson on that god-awful “political roundtable of Hillary bashers” MSNBC presents every evening at 6 PM Eastern the other night-
“Bill Clinton must go all out for Obama, because if he doesn’t the Clinton legacy will be irreparably damaged.”
That’s right- according to Robinson, that toadying Obama butt-kissing “columnist” for the ultra-Clinton hating Washington Post, says that if Obama loses, it destroys CLINTON’S legacy.
Operation Blame Hillary and Bill is already well underway. A few days ago, Howard Fineman told Keith Olbermann that McCain felt free to call Obama an Elitist because Hillary had done so in the PA primary. It’s obvious that if the Clintons campaign too hard for Obama, they are hogging the spotlight. If they don’t campaign hard enough, they are resentful assholes. If Hillary gives speeches for Obama, listen you can hear the bile rising in her voice, she doesn’t really mean it. If Bill says Obama’s election would be an historical moment for America, he’s being a racist.
I wish Bill and Hillary would tell the media to go fuck itself- and tell Obama the same thing. They are going to get trashed anyway, why not have fun in the meantime?
Agree 100%.
Clinton Derangement Syndrome is way out of hand with these media idiots.
You are so right, I saw that comment Robinson made-(and I thought “HUH!?!?!”)
Since it’s obvious that the Clintons can’t do anything right in Obamaland, I think Bill has the right idea (kiss my a$$). The bots want it both ways-Clintons are evil, but we need them (and their voters), but it will be their fault if BO loses.
These journalists are turning into dumber idiots each passing day. What is it about the Kool-Aid that makes Obama supporters lose all their common sense and their integrity? I read with horror the stuff that spew forth from people like Eugene Robinson and can’t help feeling glad that I did not drink the Kool-Aid.
I know. It’s so silly. A president’s legacy is always about the people.
It doesn’t even belong to the president, himself.
Jimmy Carter did great things with Habitat for Humanity. It hasn’t moved his legacy as a president even an inch. Same opinion today of him as has prevailed for my lifetime.
His legacy is fixed.
Ditto for Bill Clinton’s legacy.
These people who talk about it like Bill needs to guard his legacy are really off the mark as to how that works.
Historians record legacy. Not ex-presidents.
Legacy also changes with the times.
This is the problem with people who try to write about culture in the present. Culture is defined only in the past. It fluctuates.
You’re right about this, Ann. Bill Clinton’s legacy is the 1990s, and everybody knows what a good decade that was for almost all Americans. Nothing that happens during this campaign will much change the way President Clinton is remembered.
who owns the media?
do they ask in their applications
question #2 - Do you hate or love the Clintons?
Because I would believe it! Are there NO journalists that love em like we do? And I can’t help wondering why all the hate???? I’ve never seen a reason for it! EVER Even though I voted for Perot. (not real smart back then)
I have to post once, at least about this guilt by association.
We are a capitalist nation. There is always going to be a thread to some capitalist venture.
Now, just a short story. I worked for a Fortune 100 company. My job? Communications. My various CEOs (5 total) didn’t start off trusting me. Why? Because I espoused open communications. Tell the truth? Omigod!
I worked in an industry under fire.
What happened was, I convinced them. I still don’t quite know how. I attribute that to sheer idiocy in part. I was just passionate enough?
Anyway, we ended up escaping as a corporation. My little ole bitty passion about honest communications ended up being a key factor in the story.
I think I can still be googled for my award-winning program. However, my ego isn’t the point.
The point is that Obama is on the wrong track, even on a practical level.
I say, firmly, that we are more than ready for honest dialogue. We can be talked down off the ledge.
He’s harming the country by not trusting that.
I talked my company into an honest stance, and trust me……it was tough going.
By the end, the communications program was in the top 5 reasons why we were a company you wanted to buy. We retained our customers. Big deal. We retained our employees. Even bigger deal
Our employees were at ease when we merged because we hadn’t BS’d them.
Open communications works. It really works because of where we are today culturally.
Closed communications such as Obama’s campaign style?
That’s one of the reasons I know he’s not the right guy.
That doesn’t work today.
It doesn’t get anyone to the right place.
It only gets people to icy divisive positions.
That doesn’t work.
I agree with what you say re openness and honesty.
I have used both for many years, quite successfully, as guiding principles in buying and restoring failing companies and properties.
However, contrary to your one line about the ledge, I am not on a ledge. I am in fact very comfortable in my resolve re Obama and the DNC.
This is no longer just about HRC, orWJC, and “hope” that there will be apologies or admissions regarding how they were treated. I want the Democratic party punished, from the top down, for allowing such a travesty to occur. I want it to implode.
Obama lost me from the beginning, when he insulted my intelligence with his supposedly profound speeches. All I heard was a con-man, trying to sell me, and mystify me, with rehearsed, and previously used words.
From there, it has only gotten worse, if such is possible. There is nothing Obama, nor anyone supporting him, could say or do that would cause me to reconsider my opposition to him.
I support HRC because of all of the Presidential and humane qualities I see in her, I oppose Obama for his dearth of such.
And..at this point, I had rather deal with the known failings of McCain than allow the unknown, blank-page Obama and his backers to gain control of this country.
very well put. I agree 100%.
Well, MSNBC can just kiss my a**!
Bunch of losers.
Eugene Robinson can get in line behind Obama to kiss Bill’s behind.