Hillary goes all the way in W. Va.
Some day, Americans will finally be ready for a president they falsely believe to be a Muslim.
UPDATE: The white guy who dropped out of the race over three months aho has 7 percent of the vote. White males also doing extremely well on the Republican ballot.
Posted by Will Bunch @ 7:58 PM
Permalink |
54 comments
Hey, what's wrong with that? I would probably support McCain if he weren't a Muslim.
Probably anyone who believes Obama is a Muslim would find a reason - any reason - not to vote on him anyway, just because he's black, for instance. This does NOT apply to those who would vote against him based on policy reasons - that is thoroughly legitimate. But the yahoo factor is, unfortunately, also real. And there is no way to tell which voters are yahoos and which are principled opponents. I'm afraid that either way it looks better for McCain every day. And I am NOT a McCain supporter - just trying to deal with reality.
Vote "for" him, not "on" him. Of course, some would love to put a "whuppin" on him, so maybe "on" fits in a way...
What has Obama Accomplished other than absentee records in Illinois and US Senate, Empty Rhetoric and sleeping through 20 years of Rev Wrights sermons?
"What has Obama Accomplished other than absentee records in Illinois and US Senate, Empty Rhetoric and sleeping through 20 years of Rev Wrights sermons?"
when people use terms such as "empty rhetoric" to describe Obama's message I wonder if they have ever listened to anything he's said. The problem isnt with Obama, is with the people who dont like him and have deluded themselves into believing he is a great speaker who has no substance. His rhetoric is pretty clear and its not empty. Its funny that so many are critical of his "empty" rhetoric but they dont have a problem with HRC's ever changing, pandering rhetoric that adapts to whatever crowd she is speaking to the time. Obama has been no worse than HRC or McCain when it comes to laying out specifics for his plans and yet he is the only one who is constantly criticized for lacking substance.
I dont believe Obama has accomplished much less than HRC has in her 7 year Senate career.
It does not appear to me for a record of past accomplishments (although I think Obama can claim a lot more than Philly-d gives him credit for) is the best way to judge a president in advance. A long list of credits, like Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush, does not seem to give any advantage. No one could have predicted the successes and failures of Harry Truman or Lyndon Johnson based on their past records. Some of the great heroes, such as Lincoln, Kennedy, and Reagan, emerged from undistinguished backgrounds. I think it is time to go for judgement, a quality that McCain clearly lacks. Hillary Clinton continues to place what she considers politically expedient in front of good sense. Only Obama has recognized that the Iraq war was wrong from the start, the Americans are tired of a country run by lobbyists and giant corporations, and that the value of talking to ones enemies is greater than that of trying to impress the world that you are too good to deal with bad people.
The Boy Blunder is about to lose a whole lot more than his West Virginity. Mosey on over to Townhall and check out the most recent column by Amanda Carpenter. The title? "Palestinians Phonebank for Obama." If this doesn't shake your cookies, nothing will! I can't wait to see and read about the spin and damage control the Dees will have to put forth on this one!
John Edwards getting 7% of the vote in West Virginia is ridiculous! Maybe West Virginia's new tourism motto could be: Give your brain a break, come to West Virginia.
Comment removed.
Xi Jah, did the media cover the resignation of two of McCain's aides since they are still employed by DCI a firm that lobbied on BEHALF of the military junta in Myanmar? What a straigh talking reform minded maverick! Malley is an expert on the Israeli-Palestian conflict, and meets with Hamas regularly as such, and reports back to the State Dept on those meetings. Here's his quote: "My job with the International Crisis Group is to meet with all sorts of savory and unsavory people and report on what they say. I've never denied whom I meet with; that's what I do."
Oh, and the Dems won another seat in the hosue yesterday, one that was a traditional Repub stronghold in Miss., Trent Lotts old district. Add that to Hasterts old seat and the onein Louisiana. Ouch.
Yes, the media did cover the McCain resignations.
Obama is friends with a domestic terrorist. He still hasn't had to answer for that. It's more of a story than the reverend. Still hasn't had to explain that one.
Obama didn't loose WV , he never was even in the race
the comments here show us the kind of campaign that will be run against Obama this year. Instead of trying to beat him on the issues they will try to beat him by connecting him to terrorists and black preachers. Its pretty sad but thats all they have to work with so I expect them to exploit these issues as much as possible.
Comment removed.
Whats there to explain? There was a small fundraiser at the guys house over a decade ago, and they served on some boards together. Its not like Ayers will be serving in his cabinet.
Or we could go with McCain, bassackward wars and deficit spending, bassackward wars and deficit spending. Whens he going to follow bin Laden to the gates of h#ll, as he promised? Whats that, bomb-bomb Iran? Shia Iran is funding Sunni Aq in Iraq? Thats not true even though he said it multiple times? He had to be corrected by Lieberman.
Obama loses ? why not report the truth LANDSLIDE/BLOWOUT/ DISASTER
I find it hilarious that folks honestly believe that Obama has gotten this far based on biased media coverage. The same media who has spent the last 3 months beating the Rev. Wright story to death and talking about how Obama has no appeal the the "core" of the Democratic Party. the same media that put together a farce of a debate in which Obama was questioned on issues that had nothing to do with policies or personality. The same media that has been conducting polls asking voters whether or not Rev. Wright was a major factor in deciding whom to vote for. The same media who has concocted the fantasy that Obama is leading because he has such overwhelming support in the black community.
Imagine if Bunch was a Clinton supporter, and wrote about Obama's African American support in this way -- writing off black voters because one was quoted as saying that Bill Clinton called Obama's presidential aspirations a "fairy tale" because he was black.
While there is no doubt racism in West Virginia, there is racism everywhere. But the GOP's Southern Strategy has gleaned most of the "racist" vote from the Democratic party; Democrats are people that will vote for an African American if given a good reason to. Perhaps a black candidate would have to overcome more resistance than a white male, but Hillary Clinton isn't a white male --- and her background is as different from that of the people of West Virginia as Obama's. The difference is that Clinton has spent her adult life learning how to listen to and communicate with people regardless of their backgrounds.
The reason that Obama lost so badly isn't just his inability to connect with West Virginians however -- its the fact that he treats them as if its their fault. Someone who is running for President, knowing he was going to get a whupping in West Virginia, should have made a point of spending time in that state to demonstrate that even though his message wasn't getting to them, their issues and concerns were still a priority to him. If Obama is the nominee, his arrogant and petulant attitude toward West Virginians means more than just a guaranteed loss there -- it means that he's even more likely to lose Pennsylvania & Ohio.
Or he could just promise them a gas tax holiday, then never actually propose it in the Senate. Thats how you connect with voters. Shiny objects.
Obama loses ? why not report the truth LANDSLIDE/BLOWOUT/ DISASTER
because anything that raises questions about Mr. Presumptive Nominee's electability is not to be mentioned.
To me, what happened in Nebraska last night is just as significant as what happened in West Virginia. Obama won the caucus there on Super Tuesday by 2-1, because he had about 13K more caucus attendees out of a total of 38K. Last night, Nebraska had its state primary -- and since there is an open Senate seat, the primary was highly competitive for both parties. There was also a Presidential "beauty contest" on the ballot -- and Mr. Presumptive Nominee couldn't even get 50% of the votes of rank and file in a state where he's supposedly going to be so much more competitive than Hillary Clinton -- he did beat Clinton...by only 2600 votes out of about 93,000 cast. But this is the guy that the media has been saying was going to be the Democratic standard bearer for weeks now -- and who has been annointed Mr. Presumptive Nominee. Yet a majority of rank and file Democrats -- not the Obama personality cultists that bullied people at the caucuses, but the kind of voters that the party relies upon year in and year out -- sent the message DO NOT WANT. Like so much of Obama's appeal, his supposed strong support in the Western/Plains states is based on myth.
"Whats there to explain? There was a small fundraiser at the guys house over a decade ago, and they served on some boards together."
Those two things, for starters.
His terrorist activities were more than a decade ago. It's not like it was unknown when he did those two things you speak of.
I'll even buy that Obama was absent for every ridiculous rant by the Reverend. This one is plain as day. Ayers says that he wishes he could have done more terrorist acts.
He's leading in the popular vote, w/o caucuses. Seriously, I'm dizzy from the spinning. He'll win Oregon big, too.
Sorry Paul, I must have missed something. I thought you wrote that he beat Clinton
I guess I misread that, or something.
Ayers said he wish he could have done more to stop the Vietnam war. He wrote a rebuttal to the article that quoted him a few years back, you can read it if you want his actual thoughts. Still, he did what he did and it was wrong. However, still ZERO proof that Obama shares these viewpoints, the guilt by association thing has gotten tiresome.
Comment removed.
....bibde barack en han han han.
???
I agree with b.atkinson- the best way to deal with problems is to invade first and ask questions later because that policy has proven successful recently. "real" presidents start wars without an exit strategy while a "soft' president would waste time with diplomacy. I dont believe Obama has ever ruled out military action against another country but the mere fact that he has said we may have to change course in foreign relations is fodder for those who believe the US should never talk to countries we dont like. Even though we did it during the Cold War, WW2, the Vietnam War and many other times during the 20th century. According to this logic we should have attacked the Soviets back in the 50s instead of slowly working to improve relations with them and adopting a policy of not taking military action unless provoked. Imagine how well WW3 would have turned out if we had launched a preemptive strike against Russia since we didnt like them or their values.
Dear RG. RE: "Oh, and the Dems won another seat in the hosue yesterday, one that was a traditional Repub stronghold in Miss., Trent Lott's old district." True enough, but that Democrat who won referred to himself as a social conservative, that is, he is pro-life and a defender of traditional marriage. In other words, he won by running away from the Democratic Party platform. I think, when the dust finally settles in November, the Left will suffer a number of "ouches" of its own.
I would dispute Obama on the issues, but I can get out of him is hope and change
I agree Paul, Hillary won the VP slot by a landlide last night. See you in November!
TPS...
When the presumptive nominee of the party can't break 50% among rank and file Democrats in a state where he is supposedly very strong among Democrats, you've got a major problem on your hands.
Much of the Obama argument rests on his supposed far superior strength in states like Nebraska -- and most of Obama's delegate lead comes from states like Nebraska that held caucuses in which Obama zealots overwhelmed rank-and-file Democrats. This is the third time we've seen this phenomenon (TX and WA are the other two), and its glaringly obvious that the arguments made by Obama supporters about his delegate lead are based on a myth that delegate totals from caucus states reflect voter sentiment in those states. And the fact that the Presumptive Nominee only got 2600 more votes than a candidate with "no chance" at the nomination is also significant. The GOP's "presumptive nominee" got 76% of the vote in Nebraska's GOP primary; why can't Obama even break 50%?
"True enough, but that Democrat who won referred to himself as a social conservative, that is, he is pro-life and a defender of traditional marriage."......................Hmmmmm, sounds like the Dems are moving toward a ruling coalition that spans the entire social spectrum. Welcome back, Dixiecrats!!! Meanwhile, the GOP continues to become more marginalized, and continues to shrink into its core base of cultish devotion to Bush. I can't even tell what the GOP stands for anymore, can you? "Ouch" is right.
Well, Ramon, you could do some research on his platforms, by goign to his website. How 'bout you explain where Hillary and/or McCain stand on the issues. Oh right, one's "expereince", and the other is "straight talk".
Syj... while I'm all for a campaign on the issues, its a little late for Obama supporters to be decrying the lack of focus on the issues, after he built his entire campaign on "change" and "unity" and "hope."
Nor does it make much sense for Obama supporters to be complaining about "issues", when Obama has been ducking debates with Clinton for the past two and half months. Clinton was eager for more debates -- and debates that focussed on issues could have easily been arranged.
Unfortunately, Obama wants to finesse his lack of preparation and relevant experience for the job of President by making the election about "judgment". Given his paper thin resume, and his constant shape-shifting on key issues, you reallly can't complain when the GOP decides to make an "issue" out of Obama's "judgment" when it comes to people like Wright, Ayres, Rezko, etc.
"its a little late for Obama supporters to be decrying the lack of focus on the issues".............LOL, you gotta love the anti-Obamans. They complain that Obama has no substantive platform, and the minute you point out that he does, they don't want to hear it. That would just ruin their neat little "talk and no substance" meme.
Comment removed.
nice try montani.... but when Obama runs away from debates on the issues with Clinton, and wants to make the campaign against McCain about 'judgment', telling people 'go to my website to find out what my position on the issues are' isn't gonna convince anyone who isn't already on the Obama Delusional Express.
RG-Rearding the McCain statement about " Shia Iran supporting Sunni Al-Quaeda ".Is this perhaps a reflection of the old Arab/Chinese proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend " ? What bigger enemy than "The Great Satan " ?
The GOP's "presumptive nominee" got 76% of the vote in Nebraska's GOP primary; why can't Obama even break 50%?
Sorry Paul, I guess I missed something again. I thought that contrary to McCain, Obama was running against a candidate who actually hasn't withdrawn yet.
And won.
Sorry for the confusion.
YAP, he admitted he was wrong after Liberman corrected him. There is no truth to that assertation, yet McCain made it multiple times. That begs to question, is he simply ignorant of the dynamics in that region, or was he willfully tossing unfounded accusations at Iran?
Paul, its judgement on the issues. i.e. The Iraq war, the gas tax holiday, etc. May want to look at Hillary's failed attempt at running on judgement, the 3 am red phone moment. Fearmongering at its best, right from the Rove playbook. But I'm delusional.
Dear montani: RE: "Hmmmmm, sounds like the Dems are moving toward a ruling coalition that spans the entire social spectrum. Welcome back, Dixiecrats!" Wrong. The individual in question was simply a politician who understood three things: 1) all politics is local, and that understanding led him to 2) capitalize on the anti-GOP feelings in his district and also led him to undertsand that 3) the Dee platform of abortion on demand and marriage redefinition simply turns off a significant portion of the electorate, and he took advantage of these three things. He won't be alone. Conclusion: this DOES NOT add up to any such thing as a "ruling coalition that spans the entire social spectrum." He was just an example of a local politician running locally. If I were a member of the Dee's abortion and marriage redefinition industries, I wouldn't be raising any cheers at this point. Not by a long shot.
"The reason that Obama lost so badly isn't just his inability to connect with West Virginians however -- its the fact that he treats them as if its their fault. Someone who is running for President, knowing he was going to get a whupping in West Virginia, should have made a point of spending time in that state to demonstrate that even though his message wasn't getting to them, their issues and concerns were still a priority to him. "
Is this why republican candidates for President spend a lot of time campaigning in cities like Detroit, Baltimore and Philly? Have you seen Bush or any other Republican spend a lot of time asking for votes in poor or predominately black areas? stop with the double standards. Obama is expected to do everything better than any of his white predecessors and we he does the same things they have done he is heavily criticized. Certain candidates are not going to win the votes of certain groups. Obama knows this, Republicans know this, HRC knows this. Have you seen HRC campaigning in areas with lots of blacks or college grads? I havent.
"Nor does it make much sense for Obama supporters to be complaining about "issues", when Obama has been ducking debates with Clinton for the past two and half months. Clinton was eager for more debates -- and debates that focussed on issues could have easily been arranged.
Unfortunately, Obama wants to finesse his lack of preparation and relevant experience for the job of President by making the election about "judgment". Given his paper thin resume, and his constant shape-shifting on key issues, you reallly can't complain when the GOP decides to make an "issue" out of Obama's "judgment" when it comes to people like Wright, Ayres, Rezko, etc."
spoken like a true sore loser who is twisting the facts to act like his side has been jilted. Give me a break. HRC is the one who refused to offer any solutions to the social security problem. She says there is no money problem and she wouldnt have to raise the eligibility age or cut benefits- she would simply cut waste. That is code for "I dont want to say anything that might alienate any voters so I will promise everything to everyone". You people that are lecturing about lack of proposals are full of it an you know it. Obama and everyone else has a website detailing proposals. Obama is willing to debate on the issues but he knows that at this stage the media isnt going to allow that to happen as evidenced by the debacle in Phila. After 25 debates its comical that HRC supportes would make the lame argument that he is "ducking" debates because he is afraid of HRC. Are you listening to yourself? You are talking about his resume but as someone wrote in the Inqurire recently you have to compare his accomplishments as a 46 year old to hers as a 60 year old. By that measure his resume is fine. Can you name 3 major legislative accomplishments by HRC? I cant. I've heard a lot about her "experience" but few details. There arent many jobs that can directly prepare you for President.
"but when Obama runs away from debates on the issues with Clinton, and wants to make the campaign against McCain about 'judgment', telling people 'go to my website to find out what my position on the issues are' isn't gonna convince anyone who isn't already on the Obama Delusional Express."
You are very bitter and I feel sorry for you. If you bothered to watch any debates before the other candidates dropped out you would have seen Obama and HRC discussing issues. HRC and her supporters want more debates on the issues but they also say that OBama was whining about the last debate which all but avoided real issues. Obama doesnt want any more ABC debates and that is understandable but Paul says that he is avoiding debates because he is running away from the issues. After 25 debates and months to review policy papers any voter than WANTS to know where Obama stands can figure that out. Of course many folks dont want to know where he stands, they just want to argue that he has no substance. What could possibly be learned about Obama's stance on the issues that couldn't be known today after 25 debates? Nothing. He and HRC have BOTH indicated they are very close on matters of substance. That speaks for itself. Anyone who has been paying attention has heard OBamas substance. If you dont know by now maybe the problem is with you and not Obama.
I am hardly a devoted Obama supporter but common sense speaks for itself.
"If I were a member of the Dee's abortion and marriage redefinition industries, I wouldn't be raising any cheers at this point. Not by a long shot.
Posted by George Tomezsko"..............Maybe, just maybe, George, the good socially conservative folks in Mississippi are smarter than you think, and finally figured out that arguing over abortions and gay marriage isn't going to put food on the table or make them or their children any safer. Wedge issues are so yesterday, my friend. The question is, as it always should be, what have you done for us lately? Can you answer that on behalf of the GOP for them?????
"If I were a member of the Dee's abortion and marriage redefinition industries, I wouldn't be raising any cheers at this point. Not by a long shot."
can you explain why people feel you should support or no support a candidate based on their abortion position even if abortion is legal and isnt about to be overturned? It kills me that people (most repubs) really believe that one's position on that ONE issue is enough to determine if a person is competent or respectable. Most politicians have never cast a vote on whether or not to overturn legalized abortion so their position on that one issue is really irrelevant in terms of their ability to be effective once in office. The GOP has survived by getting folks out to vote on social issues even though those issues have little bearing on the lives of most voters. If that plan falls through and scare tactics dont work I would love to know where the GOP would go next in order to get support. When you dont have much to offer the working class or middle class you have to run on social issues that get conservative voters riled up.
Dear monty: RE: "Wedge issues are so yesterday, my friend." I hate to burst your bubble, but polls show as many as 25 percent of the electorate are as concerned about cultural decline as they about economic decline and poltical cooruption. All of these things are tied together, even though lefties like yourself deny it. Only conservatism offers a philosophy and a world-view that can create a healthy human environment, that is, culturally, we understand that sexuality is best reserved for a man and a woman in a committed marriage; we understand that the free enterprise system is superior to all others in terms of wealth creation; and we understand that a republican form of government is superior to direct democracy, otherwise known as mob rule. To conclude a truly rational, well-informed citizen is one who understands a healthy culture is just as important as a healthy economy or healthy schools. Capeesh?
"that is, culturally, we understand that sexuality is best reserved for a man and a woman in a committed marriage"......Why is it a cultural issue for you folks, George? Didn't nature, or God if you will, determine that for us by creating the two sexes in the first place (or do conservatives claim to have invented sex)? You folks seem to fear gay marriage as if it would cause heterosexuals to divorce and go prowl the gay bars. You need to worry more about things that really break up families, such as domestic violence, gambling or alcohol or drug addictions, unemployment, medical bills, forclosures, the need for two wage earners but no money for child care, you know, real challenges to the post-industrial family; the kinds of issues this Country would be alleviating if we really DID have true democracy, instead of a government owned by corporate interests.
George, the Taliban agrees with you, how healthy is that culture?
Actually monty and RG, since nature, or God if you will, created the two sexes in the first place (now an aside: do conservatives claim to have invented sex; no, we claim no such thing; millions of years of evolution, nay, tens of millions of years of evolution, did that, and whether one believes in God or not, those years invented it for the purposes or reproduction). And as for your statement that "you folks seem to fear gay marriage as if it would cause heterosexuals to divorce and go prowl the gay bars," that is utter nonsense. Our objection to such a thing is that any children involved in such relationships are not being exposed to a truly healthly understanding of the proper role men and women play in the propagation of the human race. I submit, without fear of contradiction, that such an understanding is simply not possible for any children living in a homosexual relationship. Conclusion? Your day is done. Your dream (that is, absolute freedom to do whatever one pleases sexually without guilt or responsibility) will remain a mere chimera, something to be enjoyed perhaps in the hereafter, but not upon the earth. It's time for you and your hero, the Boy Blunder, to grow up. Capeesh?
George, hate to tell you, but the Dems control Congress, Obama and Hillary are polling better than McCain, who isnt a harcore social conservative, anyway, no matter what he tells you to get your votes. And the amendment in PA, no chance of passing.
54 comments | View All By Latest | Paginate Comments
About Will Bunch
Will's book: Learn about it here and purchase it here.
Will Bunch, a senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News, blogs about his obsessions, including national and local politics and world affairs, the media, pop music, the Philadelphia Phillies, soccer and other sports, not necessarily in that order.
Will Bunch, a senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News, blogs about his obsessions, including national and local politics and world affairs, the media, pop music, the Philadelphia Phillies, soccer and other sports, not necessarily in that order.
E-mail Will by clicking here.
PLEASE COMMENT WITH PASSION...
...but not with racial slurs, potentially libelous allegations, obscenities or other juvenile noise. Such comments will, at our discretion, be deleted in their entirety, and repeat offenders will be blocked from commenting. ALSO: Any commenter advocating killing any government official will be immediately banned.
Thanks.
- Atrios
- Kiko's House
- Suburban Guerilla
- Booman Tribune
- All-Spin Zone
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Afro-Netizen
- Rowhouse Logic
- MyDD
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- iFlipFlop
- CorrenteWire
- upyernoz
- Tattered Coat
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- Slacktivist
- Citizen Mom
- The Next Mayor
- Philly Future
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Young Philly Politics
- Phillyblog
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Phawker
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Keystone Blog
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- BlankBaby
- Above Average Jane
- Phillyist
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- The Clog
- Josh Marshall
- Daily Kos
- Juan Cole
- Oliver Willis
- Andy Borowitz
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- BuzzFlash
- Raw Story
- Cursor
- Crooks and Liars
- Swing State Project
- Kevin Drum
- Talk Left
- AmericaBlog
- Hullabaloo
- Mad Kane
- Think Progress
- Jesus' General
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Majikthise
- Echidne of the Snakes
- David Sirota
- Glenn Greenwald
- TBogg
- Fire Dog Lake
- Taylor Marsh
- Matthew Yglesias
- Jon Swift
- Drudge Report
- Beer Leaguer
- The 700 Level
- Dick Polman
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Shallow Center
- Philling Station
- Phillies Nation
- A Citizen's Blog
- The Good Phight
- Romenesko
- Editor and Publisher
- Pressthink
- Buzzmachine
- The Inksniffer
- Media Bloodhound
- Eat the Press
- Mickey Kaus
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Blinq
- The Corner
- Instapundit
- Andrew Sullivan
- Free Republic
- James Taranto
- Blonde Sagacity
- ScrappleFace
- Blogorrhea
Blog Roll
Get it now
Philly.com Promotions
- News | Sports | Business | What's Happening | Restaurants & Food | Entertainment | Living | Marketplace | Jobs
Site Services:
Classifieds:
- Jobs | Cars | Real Estate | Rentals | Marketplace | Celebrations
Partners:
