for the first time in my adult life I am proud of AmericaSince then it has been one gaffe followed by a new scandal. On March 14th, the incendiary sermons of Reverend Jeremiah Wright were first revealed. Four weeks later on April 11th, just as that was finally dying down, Obama's famous San Francisco lines were revealed. Less than a week after that he bombs in a debate that simultaneously introduces the mainstream of the public to William Ayers.
Of course, just as that starts to simmer down, Reverend Wright embarrasses Obama with his performance at the National Press Club. Frankly, I don't remember one candidate taking so many separate hits all at once and in such a sustained and relentless fashion.
While I have learned long ago that predicting the future in politics is next to impossible, this is frankly nothing short of an obliteration on one person's candidacy. Worse yet for Obama, these are not the sort of gaffes that just go away but rather they are an albatross around his neck.
Wright is not done by a long shot. Talk about a loose cannon. There is absolutely no telling what he will say next and how his words will affect the race. The relationship with Ayers is still murky and who knows what else we will find. What if Obama makes another statement that will be perceived as "elitist". What if his wife makes another inappropriate comment? That is an awful lot that can still go wrong.
Furthermore, I think the hits aren't done by a long shot for scandalous associations. The three I see on the horizon is first, the Iraqi that has come out of the Rezko trial (at some point that association will cost him dearly), this Blackwell fellow that seemed to finance him for a while, and I have a contrarian pick, Todd Stroger.
Meanwhile, after first trying to give the race back to Obama with Tuzla, Hillary has recovered nicely. She was much better in the debate. She whacked him good on most of his gaffes, and she just had a well received performance battling O'Reilly.
What we are witnessing is the political campaign version of a train wreck. Scandal after gaffe after scandal it never ends. The only thing we are waiting for is to see which shoe will drop next.
I gotta say you're imagination is getting away with you. The difference between Obama and Clinton/McCain is that they are so dirty and rotten and corrupt that the media doesn't have and reason to bother them. Obama, on the other hand, has a chance to actually rock the boat, and he'll do it too, in spite of all you concern trolls and your posts.
ReplyDeleteIf you make a statement like that then you have to back it up with examples and facts.
ReplyDeleteBoth McCain and Clinton have long records and thus they are mostly defined. One of the reasons that Obama has been so hurt is that his slate is rather blank.
Obama's gaffes and scandals are laid directly at the feet of Obama and no one else.
I love it when Obama supporters reply to these things with complete nonsense. It really reaffirms my decision to back Hillary.
ReplyDeleteanonymous,
There is no such thing as being so dirty, rotten and corrupt that the media won't bother with you. The fact is that we know McCain and Clinton's record and controversies. They are old news and thus people don't care as much as they do about the new news. It has nothing to do with whether one person can rock the boat more than the other. It's about the news. Notice the word "new" in "news". It's what drives us.
Hey Mike - I took the dive. Check out my blog :)
ReplyDeleteMike:
ReplyDeleteFirst, let me say that I respect your commentary on this blog. However, after reading this post I cannot help but notice how it contrasted with your previous observations about the Clinton/Obama contest:
We, cynics, have a chance to see if our cynicism is warranted. We believe that the Clintons will do anything to get elected because we cynics believe the Clintons value power over anything else. That means, if we cynics are right, we will see a heavy dose of race baiting. We will see a heavy dose of hit jobs alluding to prior drug use, Tony Rezko, and they may even use Barack's name and faith against him.
Now, some reading this may in fact be saying that we have already seen that. Yes, we have seen a bit of it, however that is not the intensity that we cynics believe we will see. We cynics believe that Hillary will stop at nothing to get elected and the more that is in doubt the more desperate her tactics will become.
Now, Obama has long distanced himself from these statements. The positions of the pastor are problematic, and that is putting it diplomatically, and Obama was even married by him. That said, this is like condemning Arnold Schwarzenneger for the positions of his father. Of course, if we cynics are right, that won't stop Hillary from using it to sling mud at Obama.
(Provocateur, Jan. 28, 2008.)
Now, however, it seems as though your thoughts on these issues are now relevant and important, and are not just mud slinging. More troubling, it seems as though you have embraced the same conduct you previously forecasted and wisely condemned.
No disrespect. But could you offer your thoughts on this?
CATRM,
ReplyDeleteThat is an interesting comment. I am not sure where specifically there is a contradiction, though I would say that piece you cited didn't necessarily pan out. While Hillary has no doubt tried to muddy this race, it wasn't nearly as cynically as I thought.
Now, I am not sure which part of it is contradictory. This piece you are commenting on is an analysis. There is no question that Wright has hurt him, and that is only one of several different problems over the last couple months. That was the point of the piece. Obama has suffered greatly and most of his problems won't go away anytime soon.
I don't think that anyone should try and condemn Obama with Wright's words. Where Obama will get plenty of proper criticism is for sitting by and doing nothing, and frankly, that is how Hillary criticized him. Also, when I wrote that previous piece, the scandal had just opened up. Since, time has passed and I have been able to analyze it more fully.
Frankly, I expected Hillary to use Wright to sling mud. She wound up not doing that at all. She frankly has done very little with the issue. I certainly didn't mean to imply that the issue was only good to sling mud. Furthermore, Wright reappeared later and repeated all of the most incendiary statements again changing the dynamic.
The problem for Obama will always be that he never left the church. That is what is troubling. Wright's words are only a problem because he never did anything about it.