Obama In South Carolina: I'll Look Out For Working People — And Hillary Looks Out For Politics
In a speech today in South Carolina, Barack Obama pledged to pursue an economically populist course and to stay realistic and build coalitions — and worked in a jibe against Hillary Clinton, too. Key quote:
In the debate last night, we spent some time talking about the economy. And one of the things I brought up that concerned me was that when Senator Clinton first released her economic stimulus plan, she didn't think that workers or seniors needed immediate tax relief. She thought it could wait until things got worse. Five days later, the economy didn't really change, but the politics apparently did, because she changed her plan to look just like mine.
The full prepared speech is available after the jump.
This morning, we woke up to bad news from Wall Street. For the second day in a row, the global stock market has continued to plunge as the world continues to fear that the United States government won't do enough to prevent a recession. We hope that the rate cut announced this morning will restore some confidence and stop the damage, but the fear remains.It's a fear that hasn't just confined itself to those who nervously watch the tickers or scan the headlines of the financial section, but one that I have seen on the faces of working Americans in every corner of this country long before anxiety ever hit Wall Street.
I've seen it in the faces of families who are being forced to foreclose on their dream because an unscrupulous lender tricked them into buying a home they couldn't afford just to pocket a profit.
I've seen it in the faces of Maytag workers who labored all their lives only to see their jobs shipped overseas; who now compete with their teenagers for $7-an-hour jobs at Wal-Mart.
And I've seen it in the face of a young woman who told me she only gets three hours of sleep because she works the night shift after a full day of college and still can't afford health care for a sister who's ill.
In the last several months, their fears have grown worse and are now shared by more and more Americans. What started as a crisis in the housing market has now spilled over to the rest of the economy. Banks are facing a credit crunch, leaving businesses with less money to invest and more Americans unable to get loans. Joblessness rose more last month than at any time since just after 9/11, and oil reached $100 a barrel. People have less money to spend, higher bills to pay, and fewer opportunities for work.
For years, we were warned this might happen. But Washington did what Washington does – it looked the other way. It rewarded lenders and lobbyists with whatever they asked for while ignoring the voices of working people who needed help most. And all the while, we've been led by George W. Bush – a President who's done more to contribute to this country's widening inequality than anyone since Herbert Hoover; a President whose tax breaks for wealthy Americans who didn't need them and didn't ask for them have only encouraged the mindset in Washington and on Wall Street that "what's good for me is good enough."
That's why it's no surprise that after months and months of watching families struggle to get by in this economy, George Bush finally offered a stimulus plan last week that neglects 50 million workers and seniors who need our help the most; the very people who are most likely to spend and give our economy the boost it needs right now.
Well George Bush's economic plans haven't worked before and they're not going to start working now. More importantly, they don't reflect who we are as Americans. We haven't come this far because we practice survival of the fittest. America is America because we strive for survival of the nation – a nation where no one is left behind and everyone has a chance to achieve their dreams. That's who we are. And that's who we can be again at this defining moment.
This isn't an issue I found along the campaign trail. I introduced legislation to stop mortgage fraud and predatory lending almost two years ago. I called for a middle-class tax cut back in September that would put money into the pockets of over 90% of working Americans; that would eliminate income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000; that would give a tax credit to struggling homeowners. And that's why when I announced my economic stimulus package the other week, I called for immediate tax relief for working families and seniors – because they shouldn't have to wait another day for Washington to act. They need our help right now.
We should send each working family a $500 tax cut and each senior a $250 supplement to their Social Security check. And if the economy continues to decline in the coming weeks, we should do it again. This is the quickest way to help people pay their bills and get them to start spending.
We should also immediately make unemployment insurance available for a longer period of time and for more people who are facing job losses, and we should make sure it benefits part-time and non-traditional workers, something that will particularly help women, African-Americans and Latinos. We should help those facing foreclosure refinance their mortgages and stay in their homes, and we should provide direct relief to victims of mortgage fraud. And we should provide assistance to state and local governments so that they don't slash critical services like health care or education.
Of course, it's easy to propose plans and policies when you're on the campaign trail. You can make all sorts of promises and tell people what they want to hear when they want to hear it.
But in this time of economic anxiety and uncertainty, what this country needs most is a President who says what he means and means what he says; a President who won't just do what's right when the politics are easy, but when the politics are hard; a President who's not just in it to win it; but in it for you.
In the debate last night, we spent some time talking about the economy. And one of the things I brought up that concerned me was that when Senator Clinton first released her economic stimulus plan, she didn't think that workers or seniors needed immediate tax relief. She thought it could wait until things got worse. Five days later, the economy didn't really change, but the politics apparently did, because she changed her plan to look just like mine.
It reminds me of what happened when we started debating the credit card industry's bankruptcy bill – a bill that would make it much harder for working families to climb out of debt. Believe it or not, Senator Clinton said again last night that even though she voted for the bill, she was glad it didn't pass. I know you can get away with this in Washington, but most of us know that if you don't want to see a bill pass, there's a pretty easy option available – you can vote against it.
And we've heard her say the same kind of thing about NAFTA and China trade –agreements that sent millions of American jobs – thousands from this very state – overseas. Because only in Washington could Senator Clinton say that NAFTA led to economic improvement up until she started running for President. Now she says we need a time-out on trade. No one knows when this time-out will end. Maybe after the election.
The point is – this is exactly the kind of politics we can't afford right now. Not when the stakes are this high. Not when the economy is this fragile. Not when so many banks are foreclosing on people's dreams. We can't afford a President whose positions change with the politics of the moment, we need a President who knows that being ready on day one means getting it right from day one. And South Carolina, if you give me the chance, that's the kind of President I'll be.
In my twenty-five years of public service, my positions haven't changed when the politics got hard, and neither will the policies I pursue as President.
I started my career as a community organizer on the streets of Chicago, fighting joblessness and poverty when the local steel plant closed. I provided tax relief for working families as a state Senator in Illinois. And when I am President, I'll take away the breaks that Washington gives to companies who ship our jobs overseas, and give them to companies who create the jobs of the future right here in America.
I won't wait to raise the minimum wage every ten years – I will raise it to keep pace every year so that workers don't fall behind. I'll take on the credit card companies who are profiting by driving working families into debt. And I'll make sure that CEOs can't dump your pension with one hand while they collect a bonus with the other. That's an outrage, and it's time we had a President who knows it's an outrage.
On health care, I know what it takes to expand coverage to the uninsured. In Illinois, I brought Democrats and Republicans together to expand health care to 150,000 children and parents. And when I'm President, I'll do more to cut costs for families and businesses than anyone in this race, and I'll pass universal health care not twenty years from now, not ten years from now, but by the end of my first term in office.
And when it comes to taking away the power of lobbyists and special interests, I'm the only candidate in this race who's actually done it. In Illinois I passed the first major ethics reform in twenty-five years. In Washington I helped pass the strongest lobbying reform in a generation – we banned gifts from lobbyists, meals with lobbyists, subsidized travel on fancy jets, and for the first time in history, we forced lobbyists to tell the American public who they're raising money from and who in Congress they're funneling it to. Last night Senator Clinton defended lobbyists again, who she has said represent real Americans. Well let me tell you – if you really believe that lobbyists represent real Americans, then you don't. Washington lobbyists haven't funded my campaign, they won't run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of working Americans when I am President.
We know the road ahead will be difficult. None of the problems we face will be easy to solve and change will not happen overnight. It will take a new spirit of cooperation and sacrifice. It will require each of us to remind ourselves that we rise and fall as one nation; and that a country in which only a few prosper is antithetical to our ideals and our democracy. And it will take a President who can rally Americans of different views and backgrounds to this common cause.
I'm reminded every day that I am not a perfect man. And I will not be a perfect President. But I can promise you this – I will always say what I mean and mean what I say. I will be honest about the challenges we face. And most importantly, I will wake up every single day ready to listen to you, and work for you, and fight for you not just when it's easy, but when it's hard. That's what I did for those men and women on the streets of Chicago. That's what I've done over the last decade for the working families of Illinois. And that's what I will do for the American people if you give me the chance to lead this country. Thank you.
One take on who is telling the truth:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/obama-v-clinton.html
January 22, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blah, blah, blah, hopecakes. That's so pre-Hilary Clinton. So pre-last week.
January 22, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
More blood.
I contest the idea that a rough Democratic nomination fight would "tarnish" the eventual winner. In fact, wouldn't such a rough campaign "air out the laundry" instead, thus making any attacks along the same line by Republicans as "old news?"
There are any number of ways to spin this stuff. I think the bottom line is that this discussion is still good for the country and the Democratic Party. Besides, I like to see the blood fly.
January 22, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good for him. We have only a few weeks to go before Super Tues, so he needs to keep hitting her hard and fast if he wants to narrow the gap before the big show. Here's hoping for more of the same (and lots of it) in the next few weeks. Given the number of ice-cold mornings I have spent canvassing St Louis for Obama over the past few weeks, I want to see a candidate willing to fight hard enough to make my efforts worthwhile. ;-)
January 22, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bill Clinton and Geaorge Bush
are the same
worthless do nothings
January 22, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
So are we so afraid of not being politically correct that we cannot call
someone - a women - for what they really are.
Can we not say someone - man or women
is an asshole or a bitch?
January 22, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama living in dream land. His "present" is a clear indication he was looking out for himself rather than "people".
January 22, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
We can't afford a President whose positions change with the politics of the moment, we need a President who knows that being ready on day one means getting it right from day one.
Nice pivot off of her inane (and indefensible claim) that she'd be ready day one.
January 22, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is getting very desperate. His campaign was too late to realilze that their crass move to inject race into the campaign would backfire; he'll win SC that way, but it took him off track nationally. He's weak and unelectable, and he's not the man of principle he pretends to be. Hillary began to lift the veil on his charade last night, and did so quite effectively.
January 22, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Truth: "So are we so afraid of not being politically correct that we cannot call
someone - a women - for what they really are."
Yes. Because the truly feminist, progressive thing would be to elect a person president on the coattails of her husband's accomplishments.
January 22, 2008 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Steve
If you bend over any further
Bills a gonna crush your smokes.
Hillary is just plain old nasty -
and not in a fighting Dem way -
She is just a pain old liar,
and your falling for it,
Did you enjoy it when Bill wagged his - finger in your face and lied to you.
January 22, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
E.
perfect point
January 22, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
"He is getting very desperate."
I think you mean "frustrated," Hillary.
January 22, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good speech - need more of this. Go on opposition, stay off defense. Fight on the economy.
January 22, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I cannot call Hillary a bitch
nor can I say she would not be where she is without Bill
that would be mean
January 22, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll say this, I think Clyburn was right. Either he's going to be a better candidate in the general as result of the Clintons attempts to knee cap him, or he's going to go the way of the dodos. This is an excellent way to leverage the debate and spring forward into his own message. More of this.
No More Legacy Presidents
January 22, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's as if Bill had a zipper where his lips are located.
And he can't keep it shut and wags his finger in your face and just makes a great big mess.
January 22, 2008 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed, this is exactly what I was thinking reading these posts this morning. That which we are seeing right now is good and healthy for all concerned. If Sen Obama cannot thrive in this sort of environment, then it is best that he not be our nominee. And if he can (as I think we are seeing), then it is good that he should get into the habit now rather than later, because it will leave him better prepared to win once he takes the nomination.
Likewise, Sen Clinton benefits from a rousing challenge at this point. This keeps her in peak condition to win if she does take the nomination.
January 22, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
These are good lines of attack/defense.
Being ready on day one means getting it right on day...nice.
Iraq
Bankruptcy
Her economic plan
Health care reform
You can start making a case that Hillary was a history of messing up big decisions. And pivot to that case from her very own tag line. I like it.
Also, the policy v political argument is a good one too.
January 22, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's also important that he was able to incorporate more specifics into his rhetoric, without his rhetoric suffering. At least on paper it seems that way. He previewed it last night in the debate--he was FAR better at incorporate specifics into response and tapping into his rhetorical skills (especially on the foreign policy smack down toward the end of the debate).
January 22, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillbot Response: he only talks in vague empty rhetoric, he never tells us what he will do, he has no plans, only Hillary has plans, only Hillary says things, only Hillary is god.
Yet another great speech by Obama, and yet again, full of real policy positions and an accurate road map of what he has done, and what he will do. Yet another opportunity for the Clintons and their supporters to cover their ears and their eyes and go "lalalalalalaaa I can't hear youuu!" and then complain later that he never says anything with substance.
It happens every time...so get started..
January 22, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
my conjecture is if Obvama does not
win, I'll take my vote to the republican party. If I on the menue I want be surprise. The Clitons would posion the local warter suppy to get elected.
January 22, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
A good way to use substance v political game-playing:
My opponent, Sen Clinton, is trying to use these "present" votes against me. First off, it's important to note that we're talking about less than 1% of my total votes cast in Illinois. Sen. Clinton has missed more votes in the last (month/2 months/whatever) while campaigning than the total times I voted "present" in my 7 years in the state Senate. And I'm sure Sen. Clinton would protest that those weren't important votes she missed. But that's precisely the point: these 'present' votes weren't important votes. The bills were cheap political tricks that weren't designed to even be made into law, only to waste tax-payers' time and force some vulnerable Democrats into bad votes. If you want an example of that type of political game-playing on the national level, one need not look further than Sen. Clinton sponsoring a flag-burning bill. While some Senators view their time in the statehouse or Washington as an opportunity to play political games and boost their ammunition for the coming election, I prefer to spend my time working on real legislation that improves people's lives, like video-taping capital case interrogations, or expanding healthcare in Illinois. So yes, I voted 'present', and I'm not ashamed of it; the opposite is true, I'm proud of it. What's not to be proud of orchestrating a deliberate strategy with Planned Parenthood to subvert the same-old political games, the types of games that distract us from solving America's real problems? Senator Clinton seems to prefer misrepresenting this record and introducing those same types of bills. If you want political-point scoring, she's your girl. If you want someone who'll remain single-minded in solving America's problems, I'm your guy.
January 22, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
One simple way to judge which candidates are 'in it for you' or 'in it for money and power' is to look at the way each has handled the perks of powerful connections.
After making head of Harvard Law Review, and declining to take any high-paying corporate path, Obama is worth a million dollars or so, primarily from sales of his two books, the bulk of which went into a home purchase..... while Bill and Hillary Clinton are, after a few short years, suddenly worth upwards of fifty million dollars.
January 22, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
No wonder some Rethugs like Obama, he's all for moderate (ie, right-wing) judges:
"Because federal judges receive lifetime appointments and often serve through the terms of multiple presidents, it behooves a president"and benefits our democracy- -to find moderate nominees who can garner some measure of bipartisan support."
What a progressive that Obama is! So I guess now we know how he's going to work together with Rethugs- by letting them call the shots and doing whatever he can to appease them. Nice.
January 22, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is exactly the approach that Obama needs to take. Well don!
January 22, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Steve: as usual you have everything completely backwards, and devoid of anything resembling facts or reality. kudos.
Michael: Nice summary of the stupid present vote argument. Unfortunately, no matter how many times we (and Obama) may point out how obviously disingenuous these attacks are, the Hillbots aren't going to care, because facts aren't their style. They are plugged into the Clinton machine and they aren't going to listen to anything that challenges their fragile little HillReality(tm). Once again the questions remains, do they keep coming back with the same arguments, even after they have been completely debunked, because they really don't know any better and believe this BS is true? Or are they so shameless that they come on here and actively try to deceive people who might not know any better? Which to you think Michael, is it ignorance or GOP-style political misinformation?
January 22, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama: "Five days later, the economy didn't really change . . ."
Notice how he hedges by putting in "really" to make his lie more palatable.
Economic reports did change and Obama is lying by saying they didn't, no matter how much he hedges his statement.
January 22, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
wwjb: "Or are they so shameless that they come on here and actively try to deceive people who might not know any better?"
What a hoot coming from an Obama supporter!
Perhaps they are in a drug-induced haze, like their Ganja Guy.
January 22, 2008 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
wwjb: "Nice summary of the stupid present vote argument."
Translation: That argument hurts our candidate so no matter how true it might be it's still stupid and we're going to say so over and over until everyone believes us!
Leave it to the folks plugged into the Obamaite Orthodoxy to put their fingers in their ears and yell "nyah, nyah, nyah, I can't hear you!" whenever inconvenient facts come out about their god figure.
January 22, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama: Nader-lite.
Enough said.
January 22, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny, a Clinton supporter pointing the finger on smoking pot. Nice. Hypocrisy, check!
And "Obama Is Not Good" that is a quite a stretch to try to make his statement into a lie. The truth is, the economic indicators have been steadily in decline and pointing toward a recession for quite some time, there was no big economic bomb dropped during that time, it was all political. The media started reporting on it, and all the sudden it matters. Once again, maybe Hillary should pay a little less attention to what the media is saying, and a little more attention on the facts. Hm, kind of like when she voted to give Bush the authorization to invade Iraq, without reading the damn intelligence report first! Genius! But of course there were many of us (Obama included) who didn't need a damn report to tell us that Bush can't be trusted with the authority to use force, we weren't naive enough to think that he'd try diplomacy first, WE HAD BETTER JUDGMENT! Hillary? She just went with what was politically savvy at the time, as usual. She can criticize Obama all she wants for not taking stands or whatever, but the facts don't support her, when things aren't popular, Obama is still willing to stand up against them on principle, from opposing the Iraq war, to speaking to traditionally homophobic African American audiences about needing to quit being homophobic, to speaking to Detroit automakers about the need to make more fuel efficient vehicles. Hillary panders different groups, telling them whatever they want to hear, not what they need to hear. She has her hands all over the polls, trying to manipulate public opinion, being forceful here, tearing up there, attacking here, having her husband attack for her there. That is his point, she (and Bill) are always looking out for the political gain in any situation, they will say and do anything to get ahead, and that is that. They'll tear apart the Democratic party and lose us an election if they have to, all they care about is the short term political win.
January 22, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
wwjb: "Obama is still willing to stand up against them on principle, from opposing the Iraq war, to speaking to traditionally homophobic African American audiences about needing to quit being homophobic . . ."
Maybe he should spend more time speaking to the traditionally misogynistic black male population about needing to quit being misogynistic . . . oh, but wait, that would interfere with driving them to hysteria over the possibility of a woman president . . . nevermind.
"She has her hands all over the polls . . ."
Apparently so!
NY: Clinton 51% Obama 30%
FL: Clinton 47% Obama 29%
Too bad Obama doesn't have his hands all over the polls . . . or the voters . . .
Nationally: Clinton 42% Obama 31%
I guess that's why Obama supporters started resorting to name-calling and lying about Clinton's record long before any Clinton attacks on Obama.
Ganja Guy.
Nader-lite.
Well-deserved names for the self-proclaimed Savior of Mankind.
He can talk the Nader talk, but he's never walked the Nader walk - we need to elect him to the presidency first, and then he'll give us a movement, then he'll show us his consensus-building, then he'll show us his bipartisan appeal, then he'll establish his progressive credentials with more than hot air!
LOL.
January 22, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just like he looked out for the people who had no heat or hot water in the winter in Chicago while he got a new home.
January 22, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thats why when She mentioned Resko he shutup and looked like a little boy with his hand in the cookie jar caught by mommy.
He's a crook like the rest of them. No better no worse.
January 22, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who is Larry Sinclair ?
January 22, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mary wrote on January 22, 2008 1:45 PM:
"I cannot call Hillary a bitch
"nor can I say she would not be where she is without Bill
"that would be mean"
Thanks, Mary, for finally letting the scales fall from your eyes so you can join where most of the Hillary-haters on this site have been since I started posting here around October.
In order to see the difference, contrast the invective directed against Hillary's vote for the Iraq War authorization (which I disagree(d) with BTW), with the stony silence about this same vote and it's defense by the Kerry/Edwards ticket in 2004. Know the difference between legitimate disagreement and Hillogyny.
You can see another example in your very own post. Where would Al Gore Jr. be if it wasn't for Al Gore Sr.?
This was really a big issue for you and the Mrs. Bill people (
January 22, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whatever happens, I have to respect Obama for taking on the Clintons for their lieing ways. It is about time that the Democrats abandon the Clinton ship and move on past the 90's - THIS IS A NEW MILLENIUM: Pick someone else besides Bush/Clinton!
January 22, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anonymous wrote: "Just like he looked out for the people who had no heat or hot water in the winter in Chicago while he got a new home."
Are you freakin' serious?
January 22, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
wwjb: "They'll tear apart the Democratic party and lose us an election if they have to, all they care about is the short term political win."
This from an Obama camp that has utterly vile in its criticism of congressional Democratic leaders and the Clintons.
Too, too funny . . . and hypocrisy of the rankest sort.
The only people to lose elections for the Democrats has been the "neo-progressives" who in supporting Nader, Dean, and now Obama have demonized anyone not in lipsync with their arrogant and self-righteous so-called "principles."
January 22, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh Resko, you have got to be kidding me. That's small potatoes for the clintons. How much did the marc rich pardon cost again? 500,000 in the clintons pockets. Or how about a night in the lincoln bedroom, or a white house tea? 10k from resko, toooooo funny. The problem with clinton's attacks are that she and mr. bill are exponentially worse than anything they can throw at obama.
January 22, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
TexModDem:
Agreed. I call them the "progressiver-than-thous."
You can catch what they like to call HRC supporters here by going to any thread. Warning - it isn't pretty. Remember, these are uniters, not dividers, we're talking about.
January 22, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pick someone else besides Bush/Clinton!
(A recurring meme among the Hillary Haters.)
Yes, refusing to vote for someone because of their surname isn't ANYTHING like refusing to vote for someone because of the color of their skin!
January 22, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
colonpowwow: I call them the "progressiver-than-thous."
I like it!
Michael A: "How much did the marc rich pardon cost again?"
Since a number of conservatives themselves didn't believe the case had any merit and since a number of well-respected commenters have concluded the same and that pursuit of Rich was really simply Clinton haters doing what Clinton haters have always done to Clinton supporters, shove it.
But thanks for pushing GOP anti-Clinton talking points - that's really going to bring the Democratic Party together - oh, wait, I forget, it's about destroying the Democratic Party and replacing it with the Obama-Is-God Party.
Nevermind.
January 22, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
The truth is, Bill is not running, but Nader-lite Ganja Guy is.
January 22, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama Is Not God wrote on January 22, 2008 4:13 PM:
"Pick someone else besides Bush/Clinton!"
Agree with you. Good thing that one of those darn Adamses or Roosevelts ain't runnin.'
I hope President Obama's kid doesn't consider running. Not if he needs to depend on some of the posters here.
What a laughable "argument" for not voting for Hillary Clinton.
January 22, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
So now the Oba Wah Wah Wah babies are pulling another Bushit line out of their Master's ass:
But but your guy is worse! Hugh Hewitt says so!
This is the new politics? Sounds like the same old republican tantrums...
January 22, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
TexModDem. That's funny for a Hillary supporter to be so against misogyny in African American culture, considering their rich corporate friend Bob Johnson has been promoting misogyny and every negative black stereotype on BET his entire career, and getting rich doing it. But hey, I guess the Clintons and their friends are the true voices of black America.
January 22, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
wwjb:
"But hey, I guess the Clintons and their friends are the true voices of black America."
But hey, I guess the Obamas and their followers are the true voices of black America.
Thanks. We stand corrected.
January 22, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
wwjb: "That's funny for a Hillary supporter to be so against misogyny in African American culture, considering their rich corporate friend Bob Johnson has been promoting misogyny and every negative black stereotype on BET his entire career . . ."
Translation: Rich black people are sellouts, just like Hillary. You have to be poor and black to have any cred. And btw, if you are black and criticize our "progressiver-than-thou" Savior, you are part of the Clinton axis of evil.
Funny that I can't seem to find a single harsh word by Obama about Bob Johnson prior to his support for Clinton. I guess that's when he became a rich corporate misogynistic black stereotyper . . .
but then, he's also part of the MSM axis of evil too which responds to, SHOCKINGLY, viewer preferences!
EEEEEEEEEEAAAAK!
The Horror!
There is quite a difference between a black media mogul who responds to viewer preferences and a politician like Obama who deliberately fosters racial divisiveness and misogyny in an attempt to undermine his political opposition, particularly when that politician is holding himself out to be above all that.
January 22, 2008 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
wwjb: "But hey, I guess the Clintons and their friends are the true voices of black America."
Well, they were, by whopping margins, until Obama and his wife started preaching "you must support me [my husband] because I'm [he is] black" and proffering tendentious interpretations (of Clinton's positions and statements) designed to foster racial animosity towards the Clintons, and having supporters on blogs start calling her names and engaging in dishonest invective about her performance in Congress.
January 22, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
TexModDem wrote: "since a number of well-respected commenters have concluded...that pursuit of Rich was really simply Clinton haters doing what Clinton haters have always done to Clinton supporters...."
Huh? Giuliani indicted Marc Rich in 1983 because Rich was a Clinton supporter?
January 22, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
TexModDem wrote: "Well, they were, by whopping margins, until Obama and his wife started preaching "you must support me [my husband] because I'm [he is] black"
Please, please show us a source for this statement.
January 22, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
TexModDem wrote: " Funny that I can't seem to find a single harsh word by Obama about Bob Johnson prior to his support for Clinton. I guess that's when he became a rich corporate misogynistic black stereotyper . . ."
I don't believe I've seen a harsh word by Obama about Bob Johnson since his support for Clinton either. But for the record, a May 31, 2007 Time article said:
"Before black audiences, Obama regularly condemns violent and misogynist rap lyrics...."
So Obama is on record about the underlying issue.
January 22, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anonymous wrote on January 22, 2008 3:48 PM:
"Thats why when She mentioned Resko he shutup and looked like a little boy with his hand in the cookie jar caught by mommy."
He flat out lied about his involvement with Resko. The only thing he knows about the guy is that he billed 5 hours on a "church related" Resko project? Not according to his hometown papers. Obama probably hasn't done anything wrong from what I can tell, but why the obviously incorrect denial?
January 22, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
TexModDem,
I don't have much problem with African Americans choosing to support Obama. I can understand why members of a minority group would want to take an opportunity that is seldom offered. I am also encouraged by a poll last week showing that AAs rated Clinton highly despite their voting preference for Obama. For the substantial majority of them, voting for Obama isn't voting against Clinton.
I don't hear a lot of "I'll vote GOP over Hillary" talk from the AA community.
January 22, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
lombard wrote: "He flat out lied about his involvement with Resko. The only thing he knows about the guy is that he billed 5 hours on a "church related" Resko project? Not according to his hometown papers. Obama probably hasn't done anything wrong from what I can tell, but why the obviously incorrect denial?"
He didn't lie, he was responding to this specific allegation from Clinton:
"I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Resco, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago."
Obama never said that's the only thing he knew about Resco. He said that's the only legal work he did for Resco.
January 22, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.fakepaycheckstubs.com fake pay stubs - fake payroll stubs - fake check stubs - make fake pay stub - bad credit - loan - instant - proof of income - letter - fake check - car loan - real estate - refinance - consolidate - now - no credit - need - pay stub - make pay stub - create pay stub - fake check - fake make pay stubs - fake payroll stubs - fake check stubs - fake id ids - home loan - car loan - cash advance - cash loan - auto loan - proof of income - novelty - easy - bad credit - bad credit loan - sample paycheck stub - make - sample paycheck stubs - fake - id - ids - car refinance - home refinance - state id - identity - create - same - day - payday - slip - buy - house - home - auto - vehicle - state - create - template - sample - child support solution - prove income - proof of income letter - child support - sample - launder money - laundery money - fast - fast - payday - fake pay stubs - fake payroll stubs - fake check stubs - make fake pay stub - bad credit - loan - instant - proof of income - letter - fake check - car loan - real estate - refinance - consolidate - now - no credit - need - pay stub - make pay stub - create pay stub - fake check - fake make pay stubs - fake payroll stubs - fake check stubs - fake id ids - home loan - car loan - cash advance - cash loan - auto loan - proof of income - novelty - easy - bad credit - bad credit loan - sample paycheck stub - make - sample paycheck stubs - fake - id - ids - car refinance - home refinance - state id - identity - create - same - day - payday - slip - buy - house - home - auto - vehicle - state - create - template - sample - child support solution - prove income - proof of income letter - child support - sample - fake pay stubs - fake payroll stubs - fake check stubs - make fake pay stub - bad credit - loan - instant - proof of income - letter - fake check - car loan - real estate - refinance - consolidate - now - no credit - need - pay stub - make pay stub - create pay stub - fake check - fake make pay stubs - fake payroll stubs - fake check stubs - fake id ids - home loan - car loan - cash advance - cash loan - auto loan - proof of income - novelty - easy - bad credit - bad credit loan - sample paycheck stub - make - sample paycheck stubs - fake - id - ids - car refinance - home refinance - state id - mortgage fraud - check scam - - identity - create - same - day - payday - slip - buy - house - home - auto - vehicle - state - create - template - sample - child support solution - prove income - proof of income letter - child support - pay day advance - payday loan- small business - small business payroll - purchase - template - tax prep - tax program - small business taxes program - sample http://www.fakepaycheckstubs.com
January 23, 2008 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink