Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Tonight on Anderson Cooper: Media Drinking Kool-Aid on Obama''s "New Politics"

Kass, the Chicago Tribune columnist, said the national media is naive when it comes to Chicago politics, which is a serious business.

He said they have bought into a narrative that Obama is strictly a reformer. When the truth, Kass says, is he is a bare-knuckled politician. And using the rules to win his first office is part of who Obama is.

"It's not the tactics of 'let's all people come together and put your best ideas forward and the best ideas win,' " Kass said. "That's the spin, that's in the Kool-Aid. You can have some. Any flavor. But the real deal was get rid of Alice Palmer.

"There are those who think that registering people to vote and getting them involved in politics and then using this tactic in terms of denying Alice Palmer the right to compete, that these things are inconsistent. And guess what? They are. They are inconsistent. But that's the politics he plays."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 47May 30, 2008 5:20 AM

Here we go. The fraudulent change-meister is about to be exposed.

by Anonymousreply 1May 29, 2008 7:44 PM

Get over it Hillary, you lost. Sore losers are pathetic.

by Anonymousreply 2May 29, 2008 8:02 PM

yawn

by Anonymousreply 3May 29, 2008 8:05 PM

Well, this should put an end to all the talk about him being so soft. Nobody gets to where he is without hurting a few feelings. I say Hell Yeah! He's certainly not going to be steamrolled by the repukes.

by Anonymousreply 4May 29, 2008 8:06 PM

Great! This should reassure Hillary's supporters. After all, they kept claiming to LIKE those nasty, legalistic and pugilistic qualities as manifested so abundantly in Hillary.

Come on aboard Debbies!

by Anonymousreply 5May 29, 2008 8:08 PM

I don't have a problem voting for the guy in November but anyone who thinks he's "new" or "different" or "liberal" is in for a rude awakening.

If he wins, they'll be on the DL after a few months howling about that trickster Obama betraying them. That's when those of us who are older and wiser will get to point and laugh.

by Anonymousreply 6May 29, 2008 8:08 PM

pearls meet clutch

by Anonymousreply 7May 29, 2008 8:08 PM

Poor Clintonistas. So desperate. I would rather have a candidate that is ethical 90% of the time and dishonorable 10% of the time. Politics is hardball and if he didn't twist some arms you would be spinning it to say he was weak.

Meanwhile Hillary was pushing the Rev. Wright issue since last year and using it to try and twist the arms of all the Superdelegates in backroom tactics and McCain rides the straight talk "ethics" express with a campaign full of lobbyists.

Please.

by Anonymousreply 8May 29, 2008 8:08 PM

Kass has a bug up his ass. I've lived all around the country and Chicago is actually the least corrupt place I've lived. I'll say that again: Chicago, which is undoubtedly corrupt, is actually the least corrupt place in the USA I have ever lived. And I've lived in Boston, in Louisiana, in Tennessee, in Florida, in Georgia, in Michigan, in California, in Minnesota, in Massachusetts. And although I haven't lived there, I know enough about Arizona and New York to know that they are worse too.

by Anonymousreply 9May 29, 2008 8:10 PM

Part of the reason Chicago got such a bad reputation was that there was a constituency for reform there.

by Anonymousreply 10May 29, 2008 8:11 PM

The Hillary supporters will NEVER stop running down Obama. Even though Hillary has lost, lost, lost, they will maintain the faith by criticizing Obama and predicting his electoral defeat.

by Anonymousreply 11May 29, 2008 8:12 PM

Ya mean that albino closet case with the pot belly and micro penis who was head cheerleader for the Iraq War?

That bitch is gonna talk about being gullible!

Do tell!

by Anonymousreply 12May 29, 2008 8:12 PM

This argument makes it sound like an inconsistency. But where's the inconsistency?

He played by the rules to his advantage back then and he's playing by the rules for his advantage now.

I could go on but to comment further might be seen as Hillary bashing and I don't want to do that. I only want to respond to the Obama bashing.

But I will add that this article and Anderson's reporting on the subject belie the ridiculous complaint that the media is coddling Obama the way they coddled Bush.

by Anonymousreply 13May 29, 2008 8:14 PM

R6, good point, but I'll assure you there are plenty of us clear-eyed pragmatists who have been through a few elections and who nonetheless support Obama.

We think we know what we're getting and are prepared to live with it: centrist-Dem in some ways, progressive in others; excellent and inspiring public speaker, will do wonders at repairing America's worldwide relationships -- but will likely make some executive missteps as a rookie. Also he will be inheriting a mess of trouble and it will take a few years to work through the worst of it.

But the bottom line is that we need a Democratic president in the White House to align with, rather than oppose, the Democratic majority Congress. And to protect the Supreme Court from further rightward leaning. If McCain wins it will be such a wasted opportunity for the Democrats to wield real power together across executive & legislative branches. Democrats can't let that happen.

by Anonymousreply 14May 29, 2008 8:18 PM

Front Page CBS Web Site:

Obama Breaks Little New Ground On Policy

Washington Post: Democrat Has Not Emphasized Any Signature Domestic Issue

Already famous for his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, Barack Obama entered the Senate with more than the usual aspirations about the impact he could have.

So in 2005, he had his office arrange informal seminars so that experts on health care, the economy, energy and education could brief him. "I'm not running for president," he told a group of experts at his Capitol Hill office in the spring of 2006. But he said he had a "national voice" and wanted to use it.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 15May 29, 2008 8:32 PM

[quote]But the bottom line is that we need a Democratic president in the White House to align with, rather than oppose, the Democratic majority Congress. And to protect the Supreme Court from further rightward leaning.

Zee-ractly.

by Anonymousreply 16May 29, 2008 8:34 PM

Glad to see the media is finally beginning to expose him.

by Anonymousreply 17May 29, 2008 8:35 PM

Why has the media turned on Obama? What did he step in? I'm seeing negative press on more than a few of the major news sites.

White women cold towards Obama

Barack Obama�s favorability ratings among white women have significantly depreciated in recent months, particularly among Democrats and independents, posing an immediate obstacle for the likely Democratic nominee as he moves to shore up his party�s base.

According to a new report by The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, half of white women now have a negative perception of Obama.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 18May 29, 2008 8:36 PM

Priest and Obama Ally Mocks Clinton's Tears from Obama's Church's Pulpit

May 29, 2008 3:34 PM

Father Michael Pfleger, a fiery liberal social activist and a white reverend at an African-American church -- St. Sabinax92s Catholic Church on the South Side of Chicago -- is a longtime friend and associate of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, having known him since the presidential hopeful was a community activist. In September, the Obama campaign brought Pfleger to Iowa to host one of several interfaith forums for the campaign.

Their relationship spans decades. Pfleger has given money to Obama's campaigns and Obama as a state legislator directed at least $225,000 towards social programs at St. Sabina's, according to the Chicago Tribune.

A new Youtube video making the rounds shows Pfleger speaking at Obama's church, Trinity United Church of Christ, mocking Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, for having cried in New Hampshire, suggesting that she wept because she thought as a white person and wife of a former president she was entitled to the presidency.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 19May 29, 2008 8:38 PM

r19, his white privilege entitles him to say that. There won't be much of a firestorm over this. If anything, people will be agreeing with him.

by Anonymousreply 20May 29, 2008 8:41 PM

I agree with R6.

The starry-eyed college kids who are so gaga over Obama really don't get that he's not the second coming. He's just a politician, like any other.

He's on the side of good, yes, but don't kid yourselves that he's some sort of uniting force that's going to end partisanship and make us all buy the world a Coke.

by Anonymousreply 21May 29, 2008 8:47 PM

Washington Post: CONFLICT IN PUERTO RICO?

Obama's Island Team Includes a Lobbyist

The co-director of Barack Obama's presidential campaign in Puerto Rico is a Washington-based federal lobbyist for the government of Puerto Rico.

Ethics watchdogs said that Francisco J. Pav�a's high-profile role appears to contradict the Obama campaign's ethics guidelines, which forbid federal lobbyists from working on staff. But Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Pav�a is an "active volunteer" -- not a paid staffer -- and can hold the job without running afoul of the campaign's rules.

Obama and John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, have been trying to outdo each other in their repudiation of lobbyists and the "special interests" they represent.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 22May 29, 2008 8:47 PM

"You think yer better'n me! Well, I'm here to tell you, Miss High and Mighty, you ain't no better'n me! You ain't no better'n nobody!"

[takes drag on Marlboro]

by Anonymousreply 23May 29, 2008 8:55 PM

[quote]I would rather have a candidate that is ethical 90% of the time and dishonorable 10% of the time. Politics is hardball and if he didn't twist some arms you would be spinning it to say he was weak.

You don't get it, do you. What they are saying is that Obama is not what he appears to be on the surface. Scratch the surface and you have a run of the mill politician. But worse than than, one who plays by the worst of the old Chicago rules. One who is a bit more slick about hiding his true self.

by Anonymousreply 24May 29, 2008 8:55 PM

Yes, R24, and he kicked the White Queen's ass!

Odd, isn't it? What was supposed to be a good quality when Hillary was up is now a bad quality.

Boo fucking hoo!

by Anonymousreply 25May 29, 2008 8:57 PM

op, I believe it. Barrack doesn't back down. If he can survive Hillary he can survive anything.

by Anonymousreply 26May 29, 2008 9:01 PM

"This argument makes it sound like an inconsistency. But where's the inconsistency?

He played by the rules to his advantage back then and he's playing by the rules for his advantage now."

Are you serious?

The point is, rather than give the voters a choice, he played Bush-like games to challenge other candidates' signatures on technicalities like whether they were printed or signed. One of them happened to be Alice Palmer, who was one of his initial supporters. He put his own ambition above a true democratic election. He was wily and exploited vagaries of election law to suppress other candidates' support. The people in his Senate district were to either vote for him or not vote at all. Is this the Obama we are being sold? Not one bit.

by Anonymousreply 27May 29, 2008 9:02 PM

Gays, I only accidentally threw you under the bus with McClurkin. It wasn't intentional, how could I have this halo around my head if it'd been intentional?

by Anonymousreply 28May 29, 2008 9:03 PM

R20, you're wrong. This is another firestorm and a more difficult one to address. It's not the attack on Clinton, the press has routinely ignored and even supported attacks on her. It's the fact that he threw "as a white person" into it that is a huge problem.

Staff, family, associates and friends of Obama's cannot be anything but complimentary, or at least neutral, towards white people. Talking about their entitlement is political kryptonite. Social Security is a tea dance compared with the third rail of offending white voters.

Dismiss it if you want to but Obama's no fool and I'll bet that he's not dismissing it. He must be cursing the day he ever joined that fucking church or befriended these indiscreet morons.

by Anonymousreply 29May 29, 2008 9:26 PM

Seriously, who the fuck is Alice Palmer, and why should I care? Why is the OP dropping that name as if I should have heard of it?

by Anonymousreply 30May 29, 2008 9:42 PM

"He must be cursing the day he ever joined that fucking church or befriended these indiscreet morons."

In his book he states that when he was away at school he would have the sermons recorded and sent to him.

You really think he was unaware of what was being advanced at that church by his favorite preacher?

by Anonymousreply 31May 29, 2008 10:03 PM

R30, Alice Palmer is the Rosa Parks of resurrectionists.

Even if Aunt Betty farted dust, Alice could revive her long enough to sign a petition.

by Anonymousreply 32May 29, 2008 10:08 PM

Read the article, R30. If you want. But don't lash out because you're intellectually lazy.

by Anonymousreply 33May 29, 2008 11:23 PM

Residents of Chicago have always known that Kass is a certifiable whack job with a bug up his ass. This is the same guy that has called Mayor Richard M. Daley "an extremely militant left wing radical."

by Anonymousreply 34May 29, 2008 11:40 PM

Missing the point, again. When uncovered as a cynical professional pol--not that I care--his naive college lemmings will stay home and play Wii instead of voting.

"Dude, he's just like the other guy."

by Anonymousreply 35May 29, 2008 11:50 PM

According to a Republican strategist who was interviewed on CNN this morning, there is some incriminating information coming out about Michelle Obama at some point down the road.

by Anonymousreply 36May 29, 2008 11:54 PM

We've heard about Michelle's 'whitey' tape.

by Anonymousreply 37May 29, 2008 11:57 PM

Why does Michelle Obama hate white people so much? She comes across as very racist, and I think she really hurts her husband.

Cindy McCain , on the other hand, seems to love the whole world. Her adoption of African children is truly inspiring.

by Anonymousreply 38May 30, 2008 12:19 AM

So wait.

People whine about Obama because they think he's a light-weight, not tough enough, not a fighter, won't fight against McCain...

And then they turn around and whine that he IS tought, that he CAN play rough, that he IS a fighter...

I don't get you Obama bashers. I really don't.

by Anonymousreply 39May 30, 2008 12:26 AM

meet the new boss....

by Anonymousreply 40May 30, 2008 12:44 AM

You know I'm getting tired of hearing about how "white women" are against Obama

I happen to know several white women Who are for Obama and have been for Obama since January.

Of course I live in New York.

But I'm getting tired of the press making these generalizations.

by Anonymousreply 41May 30, 2008 1:13 AM

[quote]But I'm getting tired of the press making these generalizations.

Is it the fault of the press that most white women are racist?

by Anonymousreply 42May 30, 2008 1:49 AM

No one doubts that Obama is a fighter, But he comes off as out for himself, as opposed to Hillary who comes across as fighting for the working class against the elite.

by Anonymousreply 43May 30, 2008 2:12 AM

Anderson really down on Obama tonight. Said 'people don't really know him'.

by Anonymousreply 44May 30, 2008 3:12 AM

R42, I HOPE that was irony. If not, you're mentally defective.

by Anonymousreply 45May 30, 2008 5:12 AM

Meet the new politics, same as the old politics.

by Anonymousreply 46May 30, 2008 5:17 AM

OBAMA LOSING IN STATES HE'S WON By CARL CAMPANILE

May 29, 2008 -- A new polling analysis spells potential trouble in the fall for Democratic front-runner Barack Obama: He struggles against Republican candidate John McCain even in states where he defeated Hillary Rodham Clinton.

In the 28 states won by Obama, he has an average 45 percent of voters compared to McCain's 46 percent, according to the Gallup survey.

These states include Obama's home turf of Illinois, along with Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia and the battleground states of Colorado, Oregon, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin and Missouri.

In a McCain-Clinton matchup in those same states, McCain has 47 percent to Clinton's 45 percent.

By comparison, Clinton clobbers McCain, 50 percent to 43 percent, in the 20 states where the New York senator carried primaries and caucuses against Obama.

Clinton strongholds included solidly Democratic New York and California, as well as battleground states Pennsylvania, Ohio, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico and West Virginia.

McCain averages 46 percent to Obama's 43 percent in the Clinton states.

The Gallup analysis bolsters Clinton's contention she'd have a better chance than Obama in defeating McCain.

"Clinton appears to have the stronger chance of capitalizing on her primary strengths in the general election," said Gallup pollster Lydia Saad.

"At this stage in the race, there is some support for her argument that . . . she would be stronger than Obama in the general election."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 47May 30, 2008 5:20 AM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!