Obama On Veep Talk: Clintons Are Trying To "Hoodwink" You
Obama responded at length at an event today to the possibility -- being floated by Bill and Hillary -- of a Hillary-Obama ticket.
Key line from Obama: "If I’m not ready, how is it that you think I should be such a great vice president?"
His quote is worth running at length -- here's a transcript:
With all due respect, I’ve won twice as many states as Sen. Clinton. I’ve won more of the popular vote than Sen. Clinton. I have more delegates than Sen. Clinton. So, I don’t know how somebody who’s in second place is offering the vice presidency to the person who’s in first place. [Long applause.]...But there’s a second point. This is an interesting point -- I want you guys to follow me on this. You know Pres. Bill Clinton, back in 1992, when he was being asked about his selection for vice president, he said, “The only criteria, the most important criteria for vice president, is that that person is ready, if I fell out in the first week, that he or she would be ready to be the commander-in-chief.” That was his criteria.
Now, they have been spending the last two, three weeks -- you remember that advertisement with the phone call, telling everybody, getting all the generals to say well we’re not sure he’s ready, “I’m ready on day one, he may not be ready yet.”
But I don’t understand. If I’m not ready, how is it that you think I should be such a great vice president? Do you understand that?
See, I was trying to explain to someone the “okey-doke.” Y’all know the okey-doke? It’s when someone’s trying to bamboozle you, when they’re trying to hoodwink you. They are trying to hoodwink you. You can’t say that he’s not ready on day one, unless he’s willing to be your vice president and then he’s ready on day one.
I want everybody to be absolutely clear — I’m not running for vice president, I’m running for president of the United States of America.
I’m running for president of the United States of America. I’m running to be commander-in-chief. And the reason I’m running to be commander-in-chief is because I believe that the most important thing when you answer that phone call at 3 in the morning is: What kind of judgment you have?
And in a key line, Obama directly took on the notion that voters should want both of them on the ticket...
So I don’t want anybody here thinking that somehow, “Maybe I can get both.” Don’t think that way. You have to make a choice in this election. Are you gonna go along with the past, or are you gonna go towards the future? Are you gonna do the same old thing, or are you gonna try something new?
This will dominate the news cycle, and if Obama's supporters were worried that he hasn't hit back forcefully enough in recent days, this might go a long way towards allaying their concerns.
Video soon.
Late Update: Here's the video:
Unfortunately for Obama, the Eliot Spitzer story is probably going to overshadow this in tonight's news.
Comments (282)
This makes my day.
No, my week.
March 10, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Everyone, Check Out This Sweet Poll!
2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll
http://www.votenic.com
Our Poll is Refreshed Every Week.
March 10, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quit spamming this site.
March 10, 2008 10:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well he tied them up into a nice little bow. If the media doesn't beat the Clintons' over the head with their schizophrenic comments from the last two weeks, can we agree that this notion of media bias AGAINST the Clintons is overblown?
March 10, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I already agree. It was overblown and it is overblown. How far into the election are we? And it wasn't until this last week that the MSM started actually looking at Clinton bona fides? That says all you need to know.
March 10, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hooray!!! Finally!!
Now, let's just hope that your prediction that this will dominate the news cycle holds up. So far, they have been ignoring positive Obama news in order to remain "unbiased".
March 10, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sweet. It's been a long time coming. I think we can look forward to a retooled, more aggressive campaign from Obama. He tried playing nice...
Go big dog! WOOF!
March 10, 2008 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you. That is the sort of forceful argument that he should make, not going negative, just pointing out the hypocrisy of their logic. I'm not sure "okey-doke" "bamboozle" and "hoodwink" are the hippest terms to use, but I suppose he is speaking to a diverse audience, and Clinton has been claiming the senior vote, so, sure why not. I'm just glad that he didn't get into name calling and negativity. Obama has the strongest hand, keep playing the end-game.
March 10, 2008 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Hoodwink" and "bamboozle" are terms that channel, in a way, Malcolm X.
And that's a good thing, in my book. I'm sure this stuff will resonate, if not in the MSM, in his desired audience in Mississippi.
And again, that's a good thing for Obama.
March 10, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was a very astute observation. It is very subtle.
March 10, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I was picking up shades of Denzel actually.
March 10, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those words as code for Malcolm X rang through my head like lightening when I saw them. I grew up in Memphis, ten miles north of the Mississippi line.
I am sure that if that line is broadcast in Jackson it will stoke some excitement in some of the Democratic base.
March 10, 2008 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think Obama would do very well saying Hillary was trying to fuck people over, so I'll take bamboozle and hoodwink.
March 10, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
For those who like to note (and especially for those who distrust) his different tone of voice and usage when he speaks down South: I'm from the South, and live in NYC. We all grow up down there (at least if we're "educated") with at least two voices: the public one that we use with outsiders, and the more down-home one we use informally with other Southerners.
I'm white. But educated blacks have this even more, including many non-Southern blacks. Don't think that Obama, with his black college buds, or in his community-organizing gigs, hasn't been using this voice for years. It's not an affectation; it's part of his social equipment.
Frankly, I find it both amusing and thrilling to hear him talk this way in Mississippi, and they understand that he's doing just what I've described. It shows he has communicative empathy to go along with all that legal scholarship and political wiles.
March 10, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
You nailed that exactly. I'd add, it's not just a Southern thing.
Most Americans have a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural experience. For that matter, most of the developed world is now multi-cultural and has language and cultural influences of global origins.
Even people from the most white-bread rural areas, that some mistakenly imagine to be culturally one dimensional. They tend to speak more proper British English in the workplace, and folksy American with friends and family. They also have cable of course, and use a wide range of popular slang from surfer talk, to hip-hip, even to appropriated Japanese words like the "WASABI!!" that popped several years ago. Not just young people either, but people into their 50s and 60s, and some hipsters even older.
March 10, 2008 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dirk, that's a brilliant summation of this phenomenon. I grew up in TX but now live in the northeast. When I visit old friends, my old accent starts coming back. Too bad Senator Obama's retort is playing second fiddle to Eliot Spitzer's vices. Perhaps Senator Obama can use tommorrow night's victory to address the issue more forcefully???
March 10, 2008 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
This language is actually nothing new from Obama and as you said it seems to be part of his inherent style. He used the exact same riff responding to some other attack at a rally in Boston with Ted and Caroline Kennedy before the MA primary. It's a good folksy way of brushing off unfounded criticism in a positive tone and it works with the "folks" from Martha's Vineyard as well as those from Tupelo, MS. Folksy, down-home talk has served some presidents well in the past. Lincoln and Truman come to mind. The important thing is that it rings genuine. And I think it does from Obama.
March 10, 2008 11:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good. Finally. Obama has really got to get new media advisers and spinmeisters. Way, way too long in pushing back at this nonsense. They allowed the clintons to dominate the narrative yet again. PLEASE hire some new people, PLEASE!!!!!!!!
March 10, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nah, it was brilliant. Gotta wait a few days after stuff like this. Have you ever heard the term "Give them enough rope and they'll hang themselves"?
It is getting tighter and tighter by the Clinton's own doing.
Obama doesnt need to hit back negatively. All he has to do is point out the hypocracy.
Again, it is BRILLIANT.
March 10, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I dunno. There are clearly two schools of thought on that one. The clintons "offer" has been all over the news repeatedly. By allowing it to dominate, people will hear it and might not hear his smack down. I personally think on something as big as this, it needs to be smacked down right away so that it doesn't give the impression that he's ok with it and less people hear about the clintons' "offer."
March 10, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, you're wrong. You must always respond as quickly as possible, in the same news cycle if possible, and you must be more forceful, more funny, more direct, and more factual (not hard with the Clintons!) than they are.
And he must also start throwing HER off balance. The only time Obama has failed to exceed pre-voting expectations (NH and OH) is when he gets sandbagged right before the vote. He did well today, but he has to start developing ways to keep her off balance. The girl from the 3 am add growing up to be an Obama precinct captain is just too good to be true! Obama should make HER his running mate, at least for the next few weeks!
March 10, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that waiting was good in something like this. It's agony for those of us who follow this thing so closely. But, for most of the population, it was good to make sure that they had heard the Clintons say this stuff once or twice before he hits them with the putdown reply.
I also appreciate that he followed it with some courtly references to her persistence and industry in all this. He didn't say that she's the x7ççççç""ææ∞ we all know her to be. I wouldn't have been so kind.
March 10, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama was raised by his grandparents who are the same generation which raised the women who brought about the feminist revolution.
One of the major turn offs about him is the way he drips condscension.
Also, his retort is illogical: there is a big difference between having the first shot at that phone and the remote chance that something might happen to Clinton and he would have to answer it.
March 11, 2008 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
At some point it has to become about the reality, not the media narrative. If our society can not get to that point, we as a country deserve what we get. Having the best spin team on the right side only works while the best spin team is on the right side. That is the argument with getting rid of this spin war crap.
March 10, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, but you have to play by the rules of the game, which are spin, spin, spin. You can't let the opposition play the media like a fiddle. Whether its smacking them down by repeating the truth or whatever. You have to be quick, clear and decisive.
March 10, 2008 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but keep in mind very little of what is said now will still be relevant in 6 weeks. Bizarrely we are closer to Iowa than we are to PA in terms of time.
He needs to make sure it doesn't mess up MS which he is doing but not much is likely to change the outcome there. He will get 1 maybe 2 delegates lead out of there (think Alabama in terms of how delegates are allocated) and some momentum from a double digit win.
My take on what he is doing is letting the Clintons fire most of their ammunition so by the time it gets close to PA they will have used a lot of their best stuff and he can hit back with blows that really count. Not that I think the Clintons won't have a bunch more but...
March 10, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Such a precise and powerful rebuke to the Clinton spin of late just makes me more confident in Senator Obama.
March 10, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
yep. Absolutely.
March 10, 2008 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
March 10, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perfect. Love his use of "the Clintons" especially. The "hoodwink" language makes a clear inference that they are dispespectful of the electorate (which is clearly true). People tend not to like that.
March 10, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm breathing a little sigh of relief reading that. I was a little afraid that this was going to be a month of "nuh-uhs" by the Obama campaign, but this is exactly the kind of talk they should've been using for a couple of weeks now. It doesn't have the acidic tone of Clinton's current rhetoric, but it does have strength, assuredness, and intelligene underlying it. Phew...
March 10, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's about time...
March 10, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I try hard to keep a cool head about this stuff, and I try to exercise as much control as I can...
But I just have to say that THIS POST HAS MADE MY #$*@ING DAY!
Sorry for losing it.
March 10, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ya damn right!
March 10, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I knew there was a reason I voted for Obama. The man is superior to Hillary Clinton and John McCain. He can not only get his message across he can say it in a manner unlike the old ways of attacking your opponent -- he does it with class.
March 10, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shorter Obama to Clinton:
I. Drink. Your. MILKSHAKE!
March 10, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha!
March 10, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Finally
March 10, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, I wanted to stand up and salute. G'OBAMA!
March 10, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rhetoric doesn't matter.
March 10, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
In the words of Albert Einstein:
"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices, but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence and fulfills the duty to express the results of his thought in clear form."
President Obama...yeah...has a great ring to it.
March 10, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!
March 10, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
YES!!! HE'S BACK!! Knock it out of the park, Obama!
March 10, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why did the Clintons start talking about Obama as a VP candidate? That completely opened the door to this kind of argument. More importantly, it let Obama off the hook in regards to the C-I-C threshold question. If they had kept him on the defensive on that one, I could have angled my way in for a possible VP spot. Ah well, I'm not giving up yet.
Clinton/Sinbad '08 - An unstoppable ticket of C-I-C threshold-crossing unstoppability!
March 10, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Sinbad,
A person with your kind of clout could probably pull some strings in the Obama campaign and get some cushy ambassadorship for your cooperation and support.
U.S. Ambassador to Kosovo. How's that Sound?
Obama/Webb/Sinbad '08
March 10, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're slipping a little bit, Sinbad. You didn't refer to yourself in the third-person as 'Sinbad' enough.
You know, if Sinbad gets on a ticket with Sen. Clinton and plays his cards right, Sinbad could wind up pulling an Al Gore and snagging a Nobel Peace Prize someday for his contributions to Humanitarian Stand-up (and you won't have to have all those solemn Scandanavians trooping down to Joey's House of Ha-Ha in Passaic to catch your act, either).
March 11, 2008 2:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Those are just the points that a lot of us have been saying that he should be making. Not trying to respond by saying nasty things about her, but simply pointing out the absurdity and illogic of what she's been saying.
March 10, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Zang!
Taking the high-road indeed.
The Clinton campaign is full of enough contradictions and faulty logic that Obama doesn't need to resort to mudslinging--he just needs to call bullshit, thereby tossing the single, solitary stone that strikes the argument in the head and sends it crashing to the ground.
March 10, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is exactly how he should respond to ALL her crap - and McCain's. Address it directly. Repeat the comment or criticism himself and tear it to ribbons without being nasty in return. Be smart, unflappable and, when appropriate, funny. He can go a lot further using humor than she can using her fake outrage or shrill anger.
March 10, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Truth
March 10, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
good to hear but way too late for my taste. gotta be quicker to be forceful.
March 10, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Respectfully,
I hope you are wrong. I feel that there was SO MUCH pile-on on Friday that this response would have been lost. In fact, Senator Obama gave a great speech on Friday, with many responses to the "kitchen sink," but the chatter overwhelmed it.
The signal-to-noise ratio is much more favorable for Senator Obama today. This is getting play right out of the gate (here at least) and it dovetails handily with the atrocious response on the conference call, doubling the impact.
If they can stay on message and ahead of the cycles, they have a chance to get ahold of the reins for a while.
March 10, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
respectfully i disagree. the networks were running with clinton's "offer" and it would be obvious for them to provide air time to obama to address the offer. it fits the he-said she-said mentallity of the media.
not responding quickly makes me think of dukakis or kerry. people respect a fighter and while it might be difficult for obama to walk the line i think he needs to be stronger in this respect.
March 10, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry. I don't respect a fighter. Fighting never resolves anything.
Truth needs clear logic and good oratory to sway the mob, sadly. Fortunately for Mr. Obama he's got the mob to sway and has the brains for the logic and is a helluva speaker to boot.
The Clinton campaign has been twisting itself into little knots trying to get a rise out of him for a week now. People have been watching their antics and waiting for the response.
Now they've got it. And they got it where Republicans are powerful, where black people have been historically most vengefully oppressed, where Katrina restoration is far behind and where hope is really needed.
He still looks like something worth hoping for, and worth working for too.
March 10, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
You "don't respect a fighter?"
Do you respect a milquetoast who allows an opponent to walk all over him, degrading his abilities, background, and supporters?
If you only support people who don't fight, you only back losers. Obama's "new politics has nothing to do with not fighting, it has to do with not being in the pocket of corporate interests. He has not taken any lobbyist money. That's "new" enough.
It's ridiculous to allow an opponent to slander you without responding, and it's ridiculous to allow an opponent to mislead the public on her "experience" and record. That's not new politics, it's a disservice to the public and especially to his supporters.
March 11, 2008 6:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Only if reporters can get out of those conference calls from the Clinton campaign. How many a day are we up to, at this point?
March 10, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Last week I wanted to hurl the kitchen sink (and the refrigerator and the stove) at the Clintons.
Wiser heads prevailed. It is so simple. The truth will set you free....
Keep up the sharp elbows big guy!
March 10, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man alive do I agree with this!!
Now if this doesn't dominate we'll know for sure.
March 10, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you. That is the sort of forceful argument that he should make, not going negative, just pointing out the hypocrisy of their logic. I'm not sure "okey-doke" "bamboozle" and "hoodwink" are the hippest terms to use, but I suppose he is speaking to a diverse audience, and Clinton has been claiming the senior vote, so, sure why not. I'm just glad that he didn't get into name calling and negativity. Obama has the strongest hand, keep playing the end-game.
March 10, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. Very forceful. Couple news cycles late, but still, a reminder that no one can hit back hard and still manage to look thoughtful and agreeable like Obama can.
March 10, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just as i was wondering why his campaign had been quiet as of late he comes back with a 1-2 punch.
I am ready, she is not. No Veep because i am in first place base don all meaningful metrics.
Si Se Puede!
God i love this guy....
March 10, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's camp wanted to give the PERCEPTION to voters that it was SHE in fact that was AHEAD, not Obama. Most voters don't pay attention to the DETAILS, they just read Headlines.
Giving them the PERCEPTION that's she was AHEAD all along -- it will be less painfull to those voters supporting Obama when the Supers override their votes.
March 10, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perfect. I am so excited about this response!
I even think the quirky language is right on. It's too quaint to be seen as overly nasty - the Clintons are trying to "bamboozle" you, not you're being lied to. The end result is the same, but the tone is oh, so different.
Brilliant. GObama!
March 10, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
anyone here know why nobody from the obama camp is using "bush-clinton-bush-clinton" as a talking point? seems odd to me that they haven't really ever suggested that there's something unseemly about the world's greatest democracy being run by 2 families for decades...
seems to me that if a relative-outsider candidate like barrack gets pushed out by the clinton dynasty via a confusing, brokered convention, nobody's going to have much faith in democracy working. already, the process seems sloppy and baffling. seems like it would be worse if it was sloppy, baffling, and gave the appearance of being rigged toward the benefit of a few powerful families.
March 10, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Two reason's. They don't want to go there as it's not an argument based on policy or judgement, which is were they want to stick during the primaries. Besides, there's enough of us out there doing that for him, so why get stuck in an argument that's implicitly implied by the huge CHANGE sign behind him at every stop.
Besides, later you'll hear McCain-Bush-McCain-Bush more than enough to make up for it.
March 10, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
For all of the people who were worried about Hillary "bitch-slapping" Obama last week, I can't help but think it hurt her more than it did him. I mean, Ghandi and MLK were continually "bitch-slapped" and they were rather successful in achieving their aims. Obama seems to be employing a similar strategy.
March 10, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. I find many parallels between Senator Obama's campaign strategy and the ethic of non-violence.
March 10, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
The tactics may be similar, but he's still all for increasing the size of the military...
The Democrats' triangulation on their desire to both appear "strong" on national security and appease the overwhelming movement against the Iraq war is frustrating.
Obama has a great multi-tiered foreign policy plan and I wish he had the courage to emphasize the importance of his proposed nonmilitary programs as well.
March 10, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think it's a question of courage so much as people get bored and fall asleep really quickly at those kinds of speeches. When Obama needs to rally the troops, he isn't going to policy wonk.
The policy is there for those who care to look it up. Everyone else doesn't care enough to be interested if he were to talk about it.
March 10, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama: Hillary = (same) old thing.
March 10, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Their new campaign theme music should include the "Same Old Thing" from KRS-ONE's spoken word CD distributed with his book Ruminations.
March 10, 2008 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like Obama because he uses words like "hoodwink" and "bamboozle" in political speeches. It's like a throwback to the campaigns of the 18th and 19th centuries.
March 10, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually he's quoting Malcom X. It's one of the silly things the Hillary camp use as "evidence" of Obama's "plagiarism", even though it's more like dog-whistle language. Obama's used those terms before, generally in front of mostly-black audiences, because they connect with those voters the same way that "si se puede/Yes We Can" does with Latino voters. It's a good response and smart politics, and one of the reasons why I'm such a huge Obama supporter is that I admire the effectiveness of his campaign (makes me think he'll win in November). But it's good to understand the context and history of the language, because there's more there than just the surface text.
March 10, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, I just posted a snarky comment on another thread about Greg I'd like to take back.
I do hope Greg's right about one thing: "This will dominate the news cycle"
I've thought that before, and it hasn't. The problem isn't that Obama is not responding forcefully, the problem is he's not getting the coverage.
We'll see if that changes tonight. To be clear, I want to see this as the lead political story tonight on CNN, ABC news, MSNBC, etc.
I won't hold my breath for FOX, which will probably spin this as: Obama admits he's not qualified for CIC.
March 10, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because reporters are tied up taking conference calls from the clinton campaign. At least one a day, I'd guess, at this point.
March 10, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
More like one every hour or two. They are trying to dominate the news cycle and the right-wing corporate media is allowing them to do it.
March 10, 2008 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I think a large part of the issue lately has been that the Clinton's understand and are more than willing to give reporters what they want. Drama. I don't think the public infighting between Ikles, Penn, and Co. was accidental. At least not after the first "leak". It was a way to get the ear of reporters, offer them something a little salacious the news media will lap up, and then give then the spin during the process. The spin gets reported as factual news, and the drama gets printed on the back of the NY Post.
Obama has attempted to limit the drama coming out of his camp, but did you notice that the message that resonated most loudly from the Obama campaign last week was the "monster" comment out of Ms. Power? The media is encouraging this, and they're doing their best to keep the campaigns from taking the high road. I have no doubt that unless Obama takes to the national airways with this exact message, it'll be "old news" by 4:30 EST and replaced with the latest spin from the next two Wolfenstein conference calls.
March 10, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
And like I said, it's 3:00 and there is absolutely no coverage of Obama's response. It's like it never happened.
Can't blame there here though, anytime you can mix the words Governor, New York, and prostitution, you're going to have a story. Not a good day for the Democratic brand name. And they were doing so good...
March 10, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish... but I do have a feeling that Eliot Spitzer's little problem might lead tonight.
I wonder if Hillary will reject and condemn and repudiate (you get the idea) Spitzer over this.... ??
March 10, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thankfully I had the day off and was able to watch this speech live. Your transcript is good, but actually seeing him respond "visually" was even better. He looked relaxed and confident.
Now I'm hoping that the MSM picks up on the fact that BO is running for PRESIDENT (AND WINNING). The VP slot being offered up by the Clinton's shouldn't be taken seriously and is just another campaign strategy.
March 10, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's the Barak I feel in love with last year.....
We need more of that! I feel all starry-eyed again.
BTW - Where's idiodic? Perhaps this just can't be spun to be good news - for Hillary.
March 10, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can I ask an off-topic question? As someone who is completely clueless wrt to pop culture, what is the "I drink your milkshake" reference?
March 10, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a Daniel Day Lewis line from the movie There Will Be Blood.
March 10, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
There Will Be Blood!
March 10, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Way to go, Barack!
Someone in second place shouldn't be angling to get the person in first as her running mate.
I've been a loyal Democrat, but if he walks into that convention with more delegates and more votes and they give the nomination to Hillary, I will not vote for her.
http://iwillwalkaway.blogspot.com
March 10, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Zug --
I understand completely, and wholly support Obama for the nomination. My suggestion to you is this... write to Howard Dean / DNC / Superdelegates and demand that they follow the will of the people. If they do not, we need to do a financial boycott of the democrats. We are the ones they come to for money, since Hillary has the downscale voters. It is power to the purse, baby.
And as a side note to everyone... yes, we will have to vote for Hillary should she perform a GWB (like Bush v. Gore in 2000). The Supreme Court is in the balance... potentially 3 justices will be retiring soon. Poor Justice Stevens is 86 (or there abouts). He is healthy as a horse, but... I am certain he has been waiting for a dem to retire. With things like abortion, civil rights, habeus corpus, we cannot sit it out. If another repug gets elected, our court will be set back in time nearly a century on social issues.
Make your voice heard!!! Write to those I mentioned above. Phonebank for Obama in Pennsylvania. Donate to Obama.
March 10, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
also, this doesn't seem so effective to me. another day spent parrying criticisms is another day he's off message.
March 10, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is very much on message. He's running for the President of the United States, and he's doing it because he has the ability and the foresight to know that it's not in our interests to go into a situation like Iraq, and that it's unforgivable that some other candidates still running didn't apply what they learned from Iraq in a vote on Iran. That's judgement, and it's something that in my opinion that Obama has shown to have much more of than Hillary Clinton throughout this entire campaign.
March 10, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was concerned about "where's the response?" now I am fine about Obama. Here's another $25 buddy. Keep'em coming those responses coming..
March 10, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
A 2 for 1 here!
Dismisses HRC's VP game overall AND takes down the 3AM not ready inference at the same time.
Obama wouldn't take VP slot even if offered. Why the fuck would he want to be part of what would undoubtedly be a corrupt, scandal-plagued HRC administration only to have it taint him an eventual run at the end of that term?
He wouldn't.
Between this and the fact that Gallup and Rasmussen have BOTH swung back towards Obama now, which happened prior to Wyoming - the people seem to be waking up and thinking again.
Perhaps the praising McCain to get at Obama was the turning point?
Perhaps Obama just letting her harp day-in and day-out without really responding in kind WAS the right thing to do (she reminded people exactly why they don't like her)?
Or perhaps, just perhaps, it took a little longer for the fear-mongering of that 3AM to to give way to the rational side of the brain and now won't have the same effect going forward?
Either way, good news on all fronts today.
March 10, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
yay, Greg! I think commenters will begin to understand how TPM Election Central operates, once they see this?
How do I "recommend" a post? I'm too old-fashioned to understand how to "digg" (don't have my own blog or facebook or myspace, anyway).
March 10, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like to see it live, but the way the transcript reads, that was one hell of an "answer" to the specious VP talk coming from the clinton camp.
March 10, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ahhh... a sigh of relief. Go get 'em Barack!
March 10, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lets see how the media ignores THIS statement and goes right into REPEATING the last two weeks statements by Hillary -- giving HER once again the bulk of the prime time tonight.
March 10, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here we go back to the future: "bitch slapping, "hoodwink" and "bamboozle". Enough! You detest Hilary, we got it. Barack Obama: "the messiah", "the one", "Malcom X", "Deval Patrick" or a David Axelrod machine.
March 10, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Here we go back to the future: "bitch slapping"
..when did Obama ever use the term "bitchslapping"? Please provide a link..
March 10, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Assuming you are correct and not just biased in your assumption that people "detest" Hillary, she has no one to blame but herself and her campaign for it.
She has reaped what she has sown on this one.
March 10, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly; I always liked and respected Hillary Clinton, I was prepared to vote for her as President about a year ago and now I am repulsed by her (and Bill for that matter who I considered a personal hero for some time) This all has very little to do with Barack Obama; we are all just lucky he came along to save the Democratic party from Hillbilly now that we know what a lying corrupt politician she is.
Wake up Hillfolk; you're backward, you're out of touch and nobody likes you.
March 10, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply |