bravo turkana, bout time...

Well, to be cynical re: Obama for a minute -- of course he's going to take the high road here. That's where they payoff lies in this particular scenario.

To take umbrage would require him to prefer the more offensive of two interpretations of an ambiguous Clinton statement. To let it slide makes him look good, and doesn't really do much to help Hillary.

Turkana
point 1-Clinton said it, quit trying to blame everyone else but the source.
point 2-yeah, Obama did the right thing. again.

Plus, he's got legions of people who will get offended for him. Hillary could've played it this way, too, with Obama's "bitter" moment, but chose instead to pile on with all the rest.

It doesn't matter what she intended or how he sees it either.

She gave light to the reality of this primary right in the here and now and that's why people are attached to her quote.

There is no path to the nomination for her except through some catastrophe befalling him.

She may not have intended (probably didn't) to raise that issue, but it's raised and it's true.

Thanks for posting this up top. I quoted it earlier in the thread below and was promptly told that I was "full of shit"...probably because I made it clear that I have frankly resented Hillary's tendency to utilize "gotcha" politics and felt that Obama's response was a strong contrast.

I cave in, myself, to "gotcha" politics sometimes, but will continue to struggle against the urge to bite back, one-up, or be just plain snarky.

I won't always succeed, but as an Obama supporter I do feel good about the fact that my candidate seems to also try to rise above that stuff and focus, instead, on what needs to be done.

Obama doesn't have to be offended by Hillary's absurdity. The rest of the country reacted for him. He's coasting to victory and has no need to pile on. (It's a shame that Hillary has never shown such judgment herself. "I certainly wouldn't stay in that church for 20 years." "He's not a muslim as far as I know." Twisting the "bitter" comment into one of elitism.)

I understand Obama perfectly well. He knew that everyone else had his back. It wasn't necessary for him to point out how absurd her comment was (It was off the mark as a historical analysis as well) or how half-assed her "apology" was. He won this race in February, knows that he just has to wait her out and can dismiss any of her insulting comments as nothing more than a pesky fly.

But those dreams of Hillary being Obama's VP? Ha ha. Yeah right. Not going to happen.

Damn, I like that Barack Obama. He's a smart, effective and genuinely decent guy.

That last thing won't survive even to the inauguration, of course, but we're damn lucky to have the problem that we have a guy who can win it of whom that was ever true.

What a class act. I'll be proud to have him as my President.
______________________________________________

Now, does anyone who supported his candidacy BEFORE yesterday have any questions about how to say something positive about a candidate who was not your first choice or even your third?

I'll be here all night.

god no wonder liberals and lefties in america never win, nor get anywhere in this society (at least since the '30s) - they're too busy shooting at each other and shooting themselves in the foot.

another tempest in a teapot.

and it's so tiresome.

and i'm not a hilary supporter nor an obama supporter. but i've been around reading and watching america politics for over 35 years and this has to be the most unenjoyable tiresome uninspiring primary season ever for me to watch.....if they only had a brain.

The Clinton supporters who are using the hysteria about this incident to further rationalize thier intent to not vote for Obama, in November, should once again be reminded that he is a smarter, better, and more honest person than are many of his supporters

Thank God.

I'm not buying Obama's "good cop" routine, when a word from him could have lessend the flow of hate and vitriol weeks ago.

I wouldn't be as offended by the negative campaign he's running if he weren't making such a big stinking deal about how he's above all that. What a hypocrite.

You have to admit, the outrage over the outrage is almost as funny as the outrage itself.

Could you please stop with the false equivalence? It is misleading. We junkies have been watching this primary play out for many months now and haven't seen Clinton behaving as badly as Obama has/ Not by a long shot.
And once again last night, Obama attempted to benefit from what was a non-event that Matt Drudge and Obamaphiles twisted into a sociopathic wish.
There is a point where we need to draw the line. This kind of campaign $#%@ has got to stop. It is already too late for some of us to ever want to vote for Obama. This is a reality that the party needs to grasp. We aren't overreacting. We are saying that as long as there are two candidates in the party, we expect the party to make a wise decision about who gets the nomination. Right now, Obama is NOT a wise decision. We are saying that if they force him on us, we will not vote for him. The party has a choice. They can continue to deny this reality and lose in November or they can take it seriously and take corrective action. Do not attempt to diminish our intent. We are not f&*%ing around.

We junkies have been watching this primary play out for many months now and haven't seen Clinton behaving as badly as Obama has/ Not by a long shot.

Whuh? What the hell are you referring to? Did he have pizzas sent to her campaign HQ or something?

Responses to Turkana's 2 brief remarks, in order:

1) Habitual demonizers are unlikely to take any lesson from Obama's statement (or, for that matter, from RFK Jr.'s statement).

The demonizing style of rhetoric has been highly developed by, and deeply ground into, many, many of the leftie blogs and their comment-communities by 8 years of justified and frustrated rage against the Bush Administration. I agree with Wolcott on that score in his current Vanity Fair column -- his basic point being that a lot of that venom has been rerouted internally within the leftblogosphere. Also(after having read some of the prominent Clinton-supporting blogs for the last month), I agree with Krugman that the heavier weight of bile seems to issue from the Obama side of the argument. Please note: I distinguish here between the Obama campaign itself and Obama supporters online and in the media who indulge in intimidating, rage-filled statements.

2) It's very true that Obama is not personally responsible for the "endless streams of sewage". However I think he should do more to dial it back and reintroduce a politically productive tone than he has done to date. I find his remarks about needing to "be nice" to Clinton supporters pretty uselessly tepid and far too easy to construe as dismissive. I'm not saying he WAS, himself, being dismissive; but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of his more ardent supporters took it that way. (I know a lot of Clinton people did). This is NOT the way to go if we want to win in November.

Last, I think it's anyone's right to withhold their vote from Obama either by not voting or by writing in someone else, if they truly believe he will not make a good president. I don't think there can be any excuse for any progressive or liberal or Democrat voting for John McCain.

Obama is by the evidence I've seen certainly a smarter and more honest person than some of the people currently shooting up the scenery on his behalf. I have very strong doubts about his ability to be a good president. It's a terrible job, made even more terrible by the mess we and the whole world are in, and he's had almost no preparation. He talks well and looks good, but that's not enough, IMO.

Li'l Innocent

Sorry, Turk,
Obama flipped off another Presidential candidate.
That's the most classless thing I have ever witnessed in national politics.
Right now he's just being above it while his campaign and cronies push the story.
No dice.

Just one more word.
I honestly feel like throwing up whenever I read someone saying what a class act Obama is.
He is nothing of the sort.
At BEST he is a typical pol---and not a very smooth one at that.

As a non-American, may I interject some perspective?

You stupid, stupid, stupid OFB's: shooting yourselves in the foot, again. Anybody who watched that video clearly understood this was about the length of the primary and the calls for Hillary to quit the race.

This week we had McCain and his pastor-problems, it finally got some airplay in the media and here you are: creating a faux outrage over nothing and pushing McCain's troubles from the radar. You've given the media and the pundits an excuse to ‘move on’ and discuss the latest topic.

"Turkana
point 1-Clinton said it, quit trying to blame everyone else but the source.
point 2-yeah, Obama did the right thing. again".

Ditto.

point3- what she said was harmless
point4- it took him long enough
(Ooo, the backlash must have been swift and brutal.)

Sorry, Turkana, NO - Obama does NOT have any class and he should not be praised for FINALLY coming out to quell the shriekosphere. He allowed a full day of this hysteria to go on. He did just what he always does - allow his surrogates and his fanboys to lie, distort, and demonize Hillary over NOTHING and then come out later and pretend he is so understanding and above it all. He is the very opposite of class.

He and his supporters can take their "oh Obama is so very special that very comment has to be scrutinized because he is so very special that someone might hurt the poor baby and oh he is so very special" and stick it. Meanwhile, Hillary is lynched every day on the public airwaves, called a bitch and more, and no one bats an eye. Fuck this shit finally, I've had it.

I honestly feel like throwing up whenever I read someone saying what a class act Obama is.

I couldn't agree more, Marc. The two-bit Elmer Gantry schtick is getting really old. I continue to be surprised that so many people are falling for it when it's clearly nothing more than pandering platitudes and demagoguery.

I guess that's politics as usual, but really, what a shame.

Many of those criticizing HRC now started out supporting, or at least tolerating her, and had defended both the Clintons for years from right-wing attacks. What turned them against her was her below-the-belt attacks on Obama. Compare, for example, her response to Obama's "bitter" comment to his response to what appears to be an expressed wish to see him assassinated. I don't think that's what she intended, but she sure helped to create a situation where Obama's supporters aren't going to be giving her the benefit of the doubt. Those who live by the sword die by the sword (and no, that's not a veiled threat against Clinton!).

Oh this is rich. Obama is taken to task for not quelling the masses fast enough after his opponent, once again, says something so completely tone deaf that an uproar--completely distinct from Obama Campaign HQ---arises across the world of people gaping at her complete lack of tact. There is truly nothing that a Hillary supporter won't spin in her favor. It is probably Obama's fault that he didn't stop the media fast enough from pointing out how innane her lie about taking sniper fire in Bosnia was.

Oh, I agree that in context Hillary's comment was about the length of races. But it is equally obvious that her only shot at winning the nomination at this point is if something horrible happens to Obama. She was just being helpful in reminding everyone of just what such scenario might look like.

Wake up guys: It ain't Obama's job to rescue Hillary from herself.

We've survived eight years of the Bush Junta, we can survive four years of McCain. I simply can't trust a mendacious, sexist, race-baiting, power-hungry conniver like Obama. The fact that he inspires the worst in his online and offline mujahideen (as their latest cries of jihad show) simply underscores for me that a President Obama would be extremely dangerous and damaging to America.

When the AP has your number, it's all over:

"...the assassination reference wasn't Clinton's only mistake. In the same breath, she maintained that her husband had not wrapped up the nomination until June. In truth, he did so in March with the Illinois primary...

She also struck discordant notes in January when she said Martin Luther King's dream of racial equality was realized only when President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964...and after the WV primary, when she noted that she was beating Obama among "working, hardworking Americans, white Americans"...

"She made a similar remark about the 1968 Kennedy assassination in March that received little notice then...

[Her recent statement]without any clear explanation of how she can win, mentioning the Robert Kennedy assassination to some ears sounds like the last, desperate scenario of someone unwilling to admit defeat".

___

Yes, that's right -- Obama's reaction to this incident clearly shows he'd be worse than McCain. Quality thinking.

Jesus the anti-Obama shills are out in full force tonight. Hard to decifer which ones are truly pro-Hillary or are just trolls.

Take MarkL, for instance, giving into that bullshit line of Obama flipping off Hillary. Dear oh dear:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200804180010

This thread needs a blowtorch. I feel what you're trying to do, Turkana, and I agree with most of what you're saying, if that means something. But this is continuing to bring out the worst in both sides. The sooner this thing wraps up the better.

You know, some of us who cried when Bobby Kennedy died don't think that using his name and memory just to support the idea of staying in the race pretty cheapening, and offensive. It's not "nothing." And we have that reaction completely independently of what other candidates do or do not think.

The idea that the furor over Senator Clinton's comment was something ginned up by the Obama campaign is completely absurd. Get over yourselves and your sense of persecution. It's not all about you.

She also struck discordant notes in January when she said Martin Luther King's dream of racial equality was realized only when President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964...and after the WV primary, when she noted that she was beating Obama among "working, hardworking Americans, white Americans"...

Ah yes, the earlier idiotic manufactured pseudo-scandals. I admit I haven't followed every twist and turn of this ridiculous campaign, but if "discordant notes" is the best the Hillary haters can come up with, she must be running a pretty clean campaign. What a bunch of thin-skinned crybabies.

May I call you Madam? After all, you called me "...baby".

My rather obvious point was that the quotes were directly from today's AP [wire] story in their usual politically correct tone; and that it served as a CW consensus piece. If you, like most here, had been watching the race closely, you would know that each of the cited statements could be construed as calculated, intentionally divisive, and desperate.

I am certainly not a "Hillary hater", I'd just hate to see the Hill-Billies back in the White House. We CAN do better.

Jess

what appears to be an expressed wish to see him assassinated

Just stop for a second and think about what you wrote right there. You do know what you are accusing Hillary off, a fellow Democrat, don't you? This is far more offensive than ANYTHING that Hillary or one of her supporters has EVER said about Obama. And her supporters are supposed to take that without taking offense?

Really?

And you expect them to vote for your candidate coming fall?

Really?

The majority of Hillary-supporters will vote for your guy because they will realize the stakes are far too high to risk another Republican in the WH. But take that exact same attitude towards moderates, disgruntled republicans, and independents in the fall and you can expect your candidate to fail utterly. And not because Obama personally flunked his campaign or made a major gaffe.

It's people like you I'm worried about. People who are able to totally piss off others. And voters will hold Obama accountable for that.

People don't take it lightly when you're throwing accusations like that around. It's extremely offensive and yes: Obama seriously has to rein in his fan base, and quickly. It will fester and it will become a huge problem for him.

For the record: I'm a Dutchman, I have no bone in this fight, I'm far more to the left than any of the candidates could offer for me and in our parliamentary system I vote accordingly (GroenLinks, GreenLeft). And to me, both candidates have taken positions I prefer over the other. And both have their strengths and both have their weaknesses. Obama´s fan base is one of his weaknesses.

Since Senator Obama has not shown strong and positive leadership over his supporters, he owns how they act, whether it's towards Hillary or Hillary's supporters. For this and many reasons, first of all that he's not qualified for the job, I won't be voting for him.

I had decided to not vote at all because I couldn't vote for him and I don't agree with Repub positions, but I've had ENOUGH over this latest BS over Hillary's remarks about primaries still going on in June. They have twisted her meaning until now I've decided I'll probably vote for McCain because Obama and his people are being purposely evil and are not fit to govern the country.

I've heard it all now. Since Obama hasn't completely controlled the internet, the media and the broadcasters, (network and cable) and schooled them in how they should behave, react, report, respond or interpret his opponent's graceless statements, I'll never vote for him.

Yes, lots of open minds here.

Call me what you like, pragmaticprogressive. I've heard it all. The crybaby remark was directed at the mass of Obama supporters, who strike me as totally deluded. I'm sorry if you're among their number; I hope you come to your senses.

each of the cited statements could be construed as calculated, intentionally divisive, and desperate

I'm familar with those comments, and I didn't find them in the least bit offensive. In fact I think the suspicion that they were calculated for political effect is a ridiculous, paranoid delusion. The reaction to this phony RFK garbage is just the latest example of hypersensitivity run amok. So why should I give a shit about "gaffes"? My point was, if that's the best you got, you ain't got nothing.

MarkL, Obama did not flip off anyone. You need help.

Turkana, we "demonize" poor poor widdle Hillary because we find her comments about the possibility of Obama being assassinated as her justification to stay in a race she's lost as being in bad taste? Are you nuts?

H. Clinton again displayed her classlessness with a ghoulish statement that has no rational explanation. If you can walk past it without noticing that Hillary failed to apologize to the person whose mortality is in the way of her nomination, and to his wife and children, then maybe a classless candidate like Clinton really is your kind of nominee. Every day she's less and less the Democrats' kind of nominee.

It's over. She's lost with an incomprehensible gracelessness that can only be explained by the possibility that she did so with the intention to wreck the Democratic Party. Hopefully, a real Democrat will take away her Senate seat in a few years.

And maybe one day you'll wake up and be ashamed for your part in all this.

Dutchman,

If you had bothered to read the sentence after the one you quoted, you would have discovered that I do not believe that this is what she intended. I have been a supporter of both the Clintons for a long time now and am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt, although I prefer Obama as a candidate. But her unfortunate choice of words in today's political climate (one in which Obama has to deal with heightened threats of assassination) can unfortunately be interpreted as a statement that she's staying in the race because anything could happen, including the assassination of her opponent. Sure, one would have to be pretty hostile towards her to be convinced that that's what she meant, but she has earned that hostility in many people's eyes. At the very least, it was incredibly tone deaf and offensive, whatever her intended meaning. I understand how desperately her supporters want to somehow frame this as Obama's fault, but she hasn't earned any more benefit of the doubt than she gave Obama for the "bitter" comment. She did this to herself.

By the way, I lived in your country for a time and it's one of my favorite places in the world.

You know, assassination is sounding pretty good right now - not for Obama, but for his asshole, lying, crap supporters.

- not for Obama, but for his asshole, lying, crap supporters.

I don't know how this is much different from the usual Clinton supporter's comments.

Look, if Hillary had wanted, she could've just run off a list of every year where a nomination battle lasted until June. That would've been an effective rebuttal to the notion that she should drop out in some ways.

But that's not what she did. She cited her husband's 1992 race (which actually was already over in June, but hey...), and mentioned Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in 1968.

She could've just said 1992 and 1968, if those were the only two incidents she knew of. She could've done research, to make the list good n' big.

There are plenty of ways to reinforce the point that these things have run into June without bringing up the whole "nice campaign you've got here; it'd be a shame if something happened to it" angle."

But that's not how she chose to play it. She chose to dredge up the full awfulness of '68, and what comes out of that isn't on Obama's supporters -- it's on her.

She's just not as good at this politics business as you supporters think she is. Her calculus is off.

Polderjongen

Ditto.

Seems a Tier One/Tier Two does work, doesn't it.

Madam,

I don't think any rational and temperate Obama or Clinton supporter (excepting the above poster/troll) really thinks that Mrs. Clinton was advocating for Obama's murder.

The statement, repeated her her this week (of all weeks) - was indeed "unfortunate". At the least, it shows her to be Out of touch, politically tone-deaf, and apparently insensitive ("Hey, why not pile it on the Kennedys this week; those folks have shown that they can really take it").

Maybe all of the stress of Bill's philandering and Whitewater have encased her soul in titanium? I sure don't know.

Most troubling to me, however, is that she and her campaign have been 'on message' regarding Obama's "unelectability", "inexperience", etc. More recently, the message has been one of 'concern' that there may be a catastrophe whereby Hillary would be waiting and ready to serve 'in the wings'.

Her campaign has wondered outloud when Obama would corrode, implode ... and now - explode?

Jess

If you had bothered to read the sentence after the one you quoted, you would have discovered that I do not believe that this is what she intended.

Those who live by the sword die by the sword

Plus you intimated that the current atmosphere was her fault. This is not the first time this has happened, the OFB has created many faux outrages before this one.

Those who feel that Hillary can do no wrong seem comfortable with the tactless and tasteless hint about assassination. Hell, even the "tepid" supporters are more worried about the outrage this has caused, than the vulgar and thoughtless remarks that set it all off. Blame all this on Olbermann. It's been an especially crude and distorted week of campaigning for Hillary as she compared the rules debacle over FL and MI delagates to Election 2000's vote theft, and compared the situation to bloody and brutalized Zimbabwe. So much for a demogogue's desperate grasping.

Clinton's just embarrassing herself now, and hurting our party's chances in November.

Both your points are, as usual, well taken, Turkana. As to the first point being "Roundly ignored", it's just possible Obama's class may be rubbing off on some of his more egregious supporters.

The top rated diary at the moment over on Daily Kos is one saying (I paraphrase only slightly) "The Obama supporters who have used this incident to once again demonize Clinton should learn from his own understanding and class."

Two weeks ago, a week ago, a day ago, I'm sure (and as an Obama supporter I say it with shame and sorrow) such a diary over there wouldn't have garnered more than a handful of recommends. I sure hope it's a sign of things to come. Because if there's anything uglier than a batch of sore losers, it's a batch of sore winners.

It's time and past time to point the circular firing squad guns outward, and turn McSame and his neocons into a batch of sore losers.

pragmaticprogressive

But that's not what she did. She cited her husband's 1992 race (which actually was already over in June, but hey...),

I know Josh Marshall threw this one into the Obama-echochamber but it is a false one. No, it wasn´t over in June. Clinton and Brown had to fight it till the very last primary in California. California was Brown´s homestate and when he would have won it, Clinton would have been in serious trouble for the convention. Brown hoped that with a convincing win in California, it would throw the convention towards him. Clinton was ahead of Brown, far ahead even, before California. But not winning California would have seriously hampered his campaign and the convention. Clinton won by 48% to 41%. It still was a contested primary battle in June.

If there ever was a primary where it was legitimate to have two candidates battle it out until and even during the convention itself, it is this one. The party is virtually split through the middle.

Nicteis,

Your point is well-taken, but poorly directed. Turkana and eriposte have been spewing their partisan vitriol on this blog for months. When their arguments were weak, they used invective. When they were challenged, they ridiculed.

Yes, Obama tries to stay above the fray. I admire that quality, and aspire to it in other contexts. Left Coaster is, for better or worse, a 'border state' during the Civil War. When eriposte and Turkana stop publishing their biased prose, I'm sure this will, again, be a more peaceful place to read and comment.

Until then...

Once again, we see a ginned up fauxrage by Obama supporters, that, having run it's course or, as in this case, become counter-productive, is now tepidly denounced by Obama himself.

His campaign covertly fans the flames, then he claims credit for displaying class in attempting to put out the fire.

In South Carolina, he sat quietly while his staff pushed the race card meme, but when the internal talking point memo surfaced, suddenly he gave a wishy-washy statement that the Clintons weren't running a racist campaign and wanted to "move on."

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

See you in Denver Barack

PP, if "tone deaf" and "insensitive" is all you got... you still got nothin'. Nothing but willful misrepresentation and self-serving paranoia.

Electability and experience are totally fair game, and she's right to focus on them.

I realize that BHO is running a more entertaining dog-and-pony show than HRC. Unfortunately, his lacks substance. Thus, he deserves to lose in Denver.

According to ABC News, Bill Burton, the Obama campaign's chief spokesman, "quickly scolded Clinton" and sent an email to reporters specifically linking her statement with threats against Obama. After Drudge, MSNBC and the pro-Obama blogs ratcheted up the outrage, Obama pretends his campaign had nothing to do with pushing the false story. It is not classy, it is having it both ways. Have your campaign push the falsehood, while the candidate stays out of it. Team Obama has been feeding Drudge all campaign. Remember the Somali garb smear and the fake Kantor video smear. It happens every time the Obama campaign finds itself in a tough spot. They were losing the MI/FL debate this week so they push another false story.

She said it, he did not.

It's on her, not him. He would be studpid indeed to wade into her maelstrom.

There is an outrage, a sincere one, when you discuss assassination in political discourse.

There is nothing 'faux' about this particular Clinton faux pas.

You know, if people really are having a gut-level, emotional response to this, that makes it even more despicable and unconscionable that the media, blogosphere, and possibly Obama's campaign, are wrongly channeling all that emotion into mindless, irrational Hillary hate. What a sick, stupid spectacle.

When eriposte and Turkana stop publishing their biased prose, I'm sure this will, again, be a more peaceful place to read and comment.

Yeah, it's always nicer when you can be snug in the comfort of your own echo-chamber. Jeez...

Yeah, it's always nicer when you can be snug in the comfort of your own echo-chamber.

As a Hillary supporter, did you really think that comment through?

Psst... it's not going to Denver.

Psst... it's not going to Denver.

Well, at least not for the outcome Hillary fans want.

Talk about not thinking things through...

He does have class. A lot. More than I do. All true. But I'm not running for President. His grace makes me like him more. He has taken all the shit she has thrown at him with grace, without whining, even when she plays the race card again and again.

His dismissal of her comment does not, however, change my mind from the firm belief that she is in desperate need of mental therapy. Or an exorcist.

So why does he not condemn it?

Can't wait for her response to this. "Thank you Senator Obama, for giving me the benefit of the doubt. It's very white of you."

Contrast Obama's response with Hillary's when the tape of that Obama fundraising meeting occurred in CA.

There's the difference between the candidates, and it's why I choose Obama.

Reading thru some of these comments, it is incomprehensible to me that someone who calls themselves a Democrat would either vote for McCain, or not vote.

There are idiots on both sides, and to think that Obama (or Hillary) can control us is ludicrous. I mean really ludicrous.

Wait a second, I just got a tap on my shoulder, and was told to bite my tongue before I really let loose

Wow. I thought this site was one of the places where actual discussion could take place. I'm fine with spirited and even sometimes heated exchanges, but when all is said and done, I thought we were all Democrats and progressives and could rely upon that shared fundamental to provide a modicum of civility.

I see now that the site is actually slipping into the realm of the 'hillaryis44' crew, and that's vile territory.

It's a shame, and I am not saying that with any snark at all. I mean it, and it makes me sad because I really was delighted to discover this site.

So without melodrama, and knowing I won't be missed because I have mostly been a quiet reader, I'm taking Left Coaster off my bookmark list and leaving it to those who seem to want to snipe, find reasons to be outraged, and even go so far as to declare their allegiance to McCain. I'm done here.

Oh sure he took the high road. His campaign sent transcripts of Olbermann's special comment to the reporters.

tfitz/pragmatic- nice to see you're posting your drivel with a name again, rather than anonymously. you are always such a fine example of an obamabot.

gee, another Obama/Hillary foodfight. This campaign simply cannot end soon enough.

I thought Hillary's comment was odd, and the media's reaction overblown. And most of the posts her are the same old crap, especially madam GOP.

Hillary's "apology" did not serve her well. Really, in front of the salad dressing section of the supermarker? Is that the best her campaign can offer? No wonder she is losing.

Excuse me but is this no BO second comment about Hillary's statement? The first being: "This kind of talk has no place in a campaign" Or the like??

OMG, your all nuts!

This Country is in serious trouble and all you can do is bicker back and forth, non-stop, 24/7. What is the point? This site has lost it's way.

By-the-way, in case you have forgotten, we are in the middle of two wars and a recession. Either candidate would be better than another Republican sitting in our WH.

"I, John Sidney McCain, thanks in part to the pastry pugilists at TLC do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute for the extremely wealthy, the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability in the rich tradition of George W Bush, destroy, manipulate, and disregard the Constitution of the United States."

Shaking their head in disbelief a stubborn progressive remarked: "I regret that I had but one vote to withold from my country!"

Turkana well put. As you noted there are indeed over-zealous supporters though to one step further those supporters are on both sides not just Obama.

turkana -

i think you may have missed an important point.

my comment on sen obama's remarks:

sarcasm from a leader.

sen obama said this yesterday:

“…I will take her at her word on that.”

that phrase is not accidental.

it was precisely the phrase that senator clinton used when she was asked about sen obama’s religion some months ago.

obama was throwing clinton’s own words back at her.

now this is not uncommon human behavior, not even for those of us who are old enough to be labeled adults.

but sen obama is a guy who professes to be a leader, who claims the talent to lead, who aspires to be THE political leader of the united states.

does a person who behaves IN PUBLIC like an angry spouse really merit elevation to the presidency?

now add this in,

a month or so ago, after losing badly in pennsylvania, this same would-be president twice in one day gave a slyly delivered bird to his opponent, IN A PUBLIC SPEECH.

this is presidential behavior?

will our would-be president suddenly change his public behavior if elected?

do leopard change their spots?

do pigs fly?

does barack obama have what it takes to be a competent president?

btd at “talk left” has two posts up this morning that bear on the central question of obama’s competence to lead

- hubris

and

- a clinton-contrived controversy.

(initailly posted initiallyat correntewire)

from my viewpoint, on-the-one-hand on-the-other-hand thinking may be great for conflict reduction, but it doesn't contribute an iota to the most important problem.

The Obama campaign is so much like the Bush campaign of 2000, it's scary. Remember Bush wanting to "change the way things are done in Washington." Bush was a "uniter not a divider." Bush was willing to reach across party lines to get things done. Obama's selling the same crap to a different crowd.

Bush was going to run a positive campaign. Just what Obama's claiming. But, like Bush, Obama has more than enough surrogates and the MSM to do his dirty work for him. The smears against Hillary are practically a carbon copy of the MSM treatment of Al Gore in 2000.

And, just like Bush, Obama is all too happy to disenfrachise voters to get what he wants.

Bush had Rove. Obama has Axelrod. Both men bent on winning at any cost. Selling us candidates who are not ready for the challenges a president must face.

obama was throwing clinton’s own words back at her.

That woman is a saint to tolerate such abusive conduct. Seriously, people: she fucked up really bad. I'm not one of those who thinks she intended for the assassination resonances to cut through, but it was just a dumb, dumb thing to say.

For you Hillary people to be deploring Obama's reaction to this preposterously poor choice of words on Hillary's part is just sad. Suck it up. She made a blunder when she could ill afford it. Your camp won't be making gains by railing against Obama -- only by saying "oops, sorry for the fuck-up," and moving on.

It may seem horribly unfair, but that's the price of shooting your mouth off.

Well, I think this eliminates Hillary from the VP slot. Obama would have to be crazy to pick Hillary as a VP with all the mysterious deaths surrounding the Clintons. If I were Obama, I'd be afraid of being Vince Fostered.

muck,

you now have the credibility of jerry falwell. congratulations to you, too.

LOL
Turkana,
You know I disagree with you, but you have credibility.

I disagree with your conclusion that Obama is better than his supporters. He has consistently "stood above the fray" by allowing his supporters to do his dirty work. You are complimenting Obama for being better than his supporters, while the Obama campaign is the architect of the negative attacks on Hillary Clinton. The Obama campain IS Obama, and Barack is hardly tranformational. He plays as dirty as any old-style politician. I don't fall for Barack's false empathy. His campaign has again attempted to smear Hillary, and his followers have jumped at the chance. Meanwhile, Barack keeps his mouth shut, but then comes out after any possible damage has been done, and made himself appear like it doesn't pratice the politics of old. Yikes! How magnanimous is that? Please don't be so foolish.

"You know, assassination is sounding pretty good right now - not for Obama, but for his asshole, lying, crap supporters."

I'm a little put-off by the violent ideation, but what really offends me is the use of "crap" as an adjective.

I know it's been an emotionally draining primary season, but c'mon, people, let's have some standards.

Let's see if we can stoke the fire a bit more. From today's WaPost:

In a banner fundraising year for Democrats, the struggles of the Democratic National Committee to stockpile cash are frustrating party leaders and complicating efforts to define Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee....

[A]s of the end of April, the DNC had collected $22.8 million this year and had $4.4 left to spend; the Republican National Committee finished April with $57.6 raised and $40.6 million in its accounts.

DNC supporters say several factors have contributed to the shortfall. Among them, they say, are that the protracted race between Obama and Clinton has soaked up funds that would otherwise go the party committee...

One longtime party strategist familiar with the inner workings of the DNC went further, acknowledging that although raising money is always "a difficult thing during a primary" for the DNC, "there is serious concern about their complete lack of fundraising success."...

A high-ranking DNC official who spoke with The Washington Post on the condition he not be identified because of the sensitivity of the situation said he worries that the party's impaired financial condition is leaving it powerless to help define McCain.

"Both campaigns have expressed a desire for us to attack McCain," the official said. "We made a small media buy. But we simply cannot sustain the kind of advertising we need right now. We can't even sustain even a national cable buy for a month."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/24/AR2008052401597_pf.html

Eh, screw the party funds. Screw the money! Screw trying to attack the GOP bastard that we really need to attack, uhh, you know, that guy that our party will actually have to be facing come November. She should stay in it all the way, because it's GOOD for the party, and it's GOOD that we keep our focus and fighting amongst ourselves.

Nevermind we have an actual fucking presidential race against the GOP. God knows we can't consider those things right now, because we have to concentrate on poor little Hillary sticking her fucking foot up her damn mouth and down her throat, and all the meanie-weanie boys in the Boys Club are being Sexist and Unfair to our poor, Serious candidate.

IT'S ALL OBAMA'S FAULT!

IT'S ALL OBAMA'S FAULT!

AND IF I SAY IT LOUD ENOUGH WITH ALL LETTERS IN CAPS LIKE THIS, MORE PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE IT LIKE I DO!!!!!

So, Obama gets extra credit for being civil? He condescends to her and to women voters and that makes him classy?
Sorry, not good enough. Between his sneering disdain for almost everyone, his friendship with folks who delight in being photographed stomping on the flag, and his disingenuous claims he had No Idea Wright said things like that. . . hooey. He's a first class opportunist who would sell out Social Security, Roe V Wade, the environment and everything else ACTUALLY progressive---all to stroke his own ego. At this point, nothing could make me vote for him. I'll say this for him; he has made me appreciate Hillary's grace under pressure--his bad behavior has made her good qualities stand out in bold relief. He comes across as a petulant child grabbing for a toy, she looks more adult and professional every day.

Elliott Lake,

Sounds like a troll, or else you might be certifiable.

Your sell-out description of Obama is a nice description of the reality of the Clintons and their DLC conservative-Democrat philosophy of triangulation!

Whatever...

Is there no longer any room for discourse among people on this site? You are either a troll, insane, or an idiot when anyone posts their opinion that disagrees with another's.

Hey. Here's the thing: Obama is a timid centrist, and a weak GE candidate.

Or are we still inhabiting a Bubble Boy Bushist fact-free universe?

So it would appear.

For the record Elliot Lake is right.

I make precisely the opposite argument on my own site. I hold Obama 100% responsible for every crazed word written against Hillary on Kos, DU, and Huffington Post.

Bloggers have to police their comments. I know this, because I run a blog myself. If no policing ever took place, then all major blogs would be over-run by creeps pushing Holocaust revisionism, 9/11 conspiracy theories, and other forms of madness.

Clinton Derangement Syndrome should be classified as one of the worst forms of political psychosis.

As everyone knows, Moulitsas chased off every Hillary supporter. He then allowed his forum to turn into a worse sewer than the old Free Republic site ever was.

Obama could have stopped this debauchery with a few phone calls to Moulitsas and other bloggers. He could have said: "You're not helping me, and you're not helping the party by allowing this trash-talk to continue." A simple message.

But he didn't deliver it.

We are responsible for our inactions as well as our actions.

I will not be surprised to learn that Moulitsas has received a pay-off. In January, he wrote fairly about Hillary Clinton, and somewhat dismissively of Barack Obama. By February, Markos turned on a dime. Why?

You cannot begin to equate the progressives' anti-Hillary hysteria to the growing antipathy toward Obama. I'm sorry, but sometimes playground rules are sublime in their perfection: "He hit first" is an unassailable argument. Ask any Russian whether his country was justified when it marched into Germany in 1945.

The Obots hit first.

We are hitting back.

The only way we can do so is to withhold our support from the Democratic party if Obama is the nominee.

Please understand: I am NOT smitten with Hillary. In fact, I wish she had not run. I voted for Barack Obama in the California primary.

But I will not tolerate what has happened to what was once my party.

This is a serious matter. This is a growing movement. If the Obots continue to delude themselves into thinking that they can woo us by insulting us -- well, they are in for one hell of a surprise.

Clinton (twice) and a surrogate (at least once) made statements suggesting that Obama's chance of death in the next couple of months justifies her remaining in the race when she's mathematically eliminated.

This along with other comments by Huckabee and Trotta have made the Obama supporters angry.

Let us take Clinton at her word. By saying that she's sticking around in case Obama dies she ensures the enmity of Obama supporters and many of the folks who believe in the Vince Foster mythology. So why has she and others repeated this? It's counterproductive. All it is is divisive.

And here's where I think it gets interesting. Clinton is being divisive. That is her sole reason for continuing in the race. Her followers are incapable of seeing this and so internally justify this quest, but it's obvious to anyone with a calculator that she isn't winning the nomination. She is doing her best to split up the Democratic Party by gender and race. She is doing the same thing that her political supporter Rush Limbaugh is doing. She is bloodying up Obama for the general election. She is doing the Republicans' work. And she has been well-paid to do it.

Once again Obama claims that he is above the fray and "we should give Clinton the benefit of the doubt about what she intended to say". Then we learn yesterday on Sunday talking head shows that it was the Obama campaign that distributed far and wide video and transcripts of what she said to media outlets and repoters all over the country so that a non-story would grow legs and get repeated over and over. I've wondered about this for some time. The narrative of a particular story gets printed, talked about and "reported" by various media outlets all over the country at the same time. Its called lazy journalism. Instead of reporting, they are just dittoing whatever talking points have been distributed. We know that the Obama campaign has been very effective at "googlebombing" so that whenever you look up a person or topic that might be detrimental to Obama, you are directed to a page that has nothing to do with the topic you were exploring or you are directed to "Obama for President" or " Obama statements" or "another Superdelegate endorses Obama". It might be effective except that reporters are obviously just googling stuff and end up reporting the same tired stuff, no original reporting at all. There are no investigations anymore. But, I've got news for the Obama people. The Republicans are extremely effective at this stuff too. They are just waiting for Hillary to drop out before they begin. Obama may be able to refuse to debate Hillary after he was asked some tough questions since the debate wasn't sponsored by MSNBC, but he will have to debate John McCain. I hope he is studying.

Obama's campaign deliberately distributed KO's RFK vitriol hit-piece to the news media. How is Obama not ultimately & personally responsible for that?

Thank you Joseph Cannon. I agree with everything you wrote. I will never vote for Obama Nation now despite the fact that I, like you, vote for him in the primary. Simply put, they took it too far. If the mob rule and character assassination continue on, I will probably tip over from not voting for Obama to doing everything I can to help McCain beat him. I am thoroughly disgusted.

The only Republican I have much to do with said today that "they took her statement out of context" and "the media is for Obama." I wanted to laugh. If she can see it, I guess it's not just me by a long shot.
And she's a person who was happy Bush let Scooter Libby off the hook. I never thought I'd see her be sympathetic to ANY Democrat.

Way too much adrenalin there, Joeseph Cannon. A bit hyperbolic on the cusp of insanity, to bring in Hitler's invasion of Russia.