T Nation

How Is This Not Politics As Usual?

I’m actually comforted by this, in that it confirms my position that Obama was using NAFTA critiques as “boob bait for bubbas” in Ohio and similar states - but how is this any different from politics as usual?

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/austan_goolsbee_lives.php

He’s back on the campaign, as if his honesty about NAFTA, and subsequent dismissal from the campaign, never occurred. I’ll just wait for Samantha Power to come back as well - she was the boob bait for bobos on the flub of being honest about the fact we wouldn’t immediately withdraw from Iraq if Obama were elected.

Plus, Jim Johnson, who was in charge of the unreported disaster at Fannie Mae that made Enron look like a failed lemonade stand (but Fannie Mae isn’t allowed to fail - it just got more taxpayer money…), was named by Obama to be one member of his three-member VP-selection committee:

http://www.slate.com/id/2192801/#embarrassed ; http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/james_johnson_a_problem.php ; http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/10561

Which probably wouldn’t horrible if Obama weren’t always railing against those greedy CEOs - I guess there’s an implied exception for the greedy former CEOs on his selection committee…

Then there’s that Tony Rezko guy, who was convicted of corruption:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2077135/Barack-Obama-ally-Tony-Rezko-convicted-of-corruption.html ; http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTQyNjk1MmZhNDYyZjQ0OGNlMDIzOGMzZDQwMjk3NTY=&w=MA==

Obama on Rezko: “I’m saddened by today�??s verdict. This isn’t the Tony Rezko I knew, but now he has been convicted by a jury on multiple charges that once again shine a spotlight on the need for reform. I encourage the General Assembly to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent these kinds of abuses in the future.”

Recall Obama on Wright: “I’ve known Rev. Wright for almost 20 years. The person that I saw yesterday was not the person I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church.”

I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that if Jim Johnson turns into a big problem, Jim Johnson is not going to be the man Obama knew…

Let’s be realistic here - there are quite a few folks (read: idiots) who think Obama is some sort of saintly messiah (see this blog for some beautiful quotes: http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/ ), and he’s playing it up with his claims to be above politics as usual. But he’s a product of one of the most corrupt, of not the most corrupt, local political machines in the United States, Chicago. I’m guessing he didn’t come through smelling like roses. Typical politician - overpromising, and underdelivering.

The thing about being put on a pedestal is that it can be kind of painful to fall off…

Take it up with the people on that blog. Around here, nobody believes Obama is anything more than your run-of-the-mill sleazy politician.

“That Islamist maniac that just exploded a nuke on Israel is not the same man I met with a year ago.”

That is a hilarious site. Yet scary and disturbing.

Comparing Obama and his anti-life views to a Messiah is both saddening and apalling.

[quote]GreenMountains wrote:

That is a hilarious site. Yet scary and disturbing.
[/quote]

[i]
“… a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany … and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Obama” - Barack Obama Lebanon, New Hampshire.
January 7, 2008.

[/i]

Is this a real quote?

That messiah blog - it’s tongue-in-cheek, right? My sarcasm meter must be broken lol!

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
That messiah blog - it’s tongue-in-cheek, right? My sarcasm meter must be broken lol![/quote]

The blog is tongue-in-cheek; the quotes are real and seemingly serious…

[quote]tedro wrote:
Comparing Obama and his anti-life views to a Messiah is both saddening and apalling.[/quote]

What anti-life views?

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
I’m actually comforted by this, in that it confirms my position that Obama was using NAFTA critiques as “boob bait for bubbas” in Ohio and similar states - but how is this any different from politics as usual?

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/austan_goolsbee_lives.php

He’s back on the campaign, as if his honesty about NAFTA, and subsequent dismissal from the campaign, never occurred. I’ll just wait for Samantha Power to come back as well - she was the boob bait for bobos on the flub of being honest about the fact we wouldn’t immediately withdraw from Iraq if Obama were elected.

Plus, Jim Johnson, who was in charge of the unreported disaster at Fannie Mae that made Enron look like a failed lemonade stand (but Fannie Mae isn’t allowed to fail - it just got more taxpayer money…), was named by Obama to be one member of his three-member VP-selection committee:

http://www.slate.com/id/2192801/#embarrassed ; http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/james_johnson_a_problem.php ; http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/10561

Which probably wouldn’t horrible if Obama weren’t always railing against those greedy CEOs - I guess there’s an implied exception for the greedy former CEOs on his selection committee…

Then there’s that Tony Rezko guy, who was convicted of corruption:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2077135/Barack-Obama-ally-Tony-Rezko-convicted-of-corruption.html ; http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTQyNjk1MmZhNDYyZjQ0OGNlMDIzOGMzZDQwMjk3NTY=&w=MA==

Obama on Rezko: “I’m saddened by today�??s verdict. This isn’t the Tony Rezko I knew, but now he has been convicted by a jury on multiple charges that once again shine a spotlight on the need for reform. I encourage the General Assembly to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent these kinds of abuses in the future.”

Recall Obama on Wright: “I’ve known Rev. Wright for almost 20 years. The person that I saw yesterday was not the person I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church.”

I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that if Jim Johnson turns into a big problem, Jim Johnson is not going to be the man Obama knew…

Let’s be realistic here - there are quite a few folks (read: idiots) who think Obama is some sort of saintly messiah (see this blog for some beautiful quotes: http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/ ), and he’s playing it up with his claims to be above politics as usual. But he’s a product of one of the most corrupt, of not the most corrupt, local political machines in the United States, Chicago. I’m guessing he didn’t come through smelling like roses. Typical politician - overpromising, and underdelivering.

The thing about being put on a pedestal is that it can be kind of painful to fall off…

[/quote]

It never stops. (I’m guessing Obama must have moved up in the tracking polls)
Again if this stuff bothers you (which I’m sure it doesn’t), then how could you possibly vote for McCain. I mean Phil f**king Gramm.

[quote]100meters wrote:
tedro wrote:
Comparing Obama and his anti-life views to a Messiah is both saddening and apalling.

What anti-life views?[/quote]

He voted to give Bush money for Iraq.

[quote]100meters wrote:

It never stops. (I’m guessing Obama must have moved up in the tracking polls)
Again if this stuff bothers you (which I’m sure it doesn’t), then how could you possibly vote for McCain. I mean Phil f**king Gramm.

[/quote]

How did Phil Gramm personally profit from his support of deregulation? I’m aware of the Enron rumors, which were just that.

I’m also aware of the recent efforts to blame “deregulation” for all of the sub-prime woes - funny how it was a worldwide phenomenon, and that CDOs were developed and pushed out of London first. I agree with Megan McCardle ( http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/two_four_six_eight_how_we_gonn.php ) - lots of folks are blaming deregulation and wanting more regulation, but I haven’t seen too many particulars as to what regulations they would want, or how such regulations specifically would have averted the credit crunch - and even more particularly, how Phil Gramm’s deregulation led directly to the credit crunch.

Aside from that, how is this not politics as usual? You never do want to answer the questions…

What about the boob bait for the bubbas and bobos?

ADDENDUM: Well, I suppose to bobos could fool themselves and assume he would only like to the bubbas - or maybe they just enjoy getting all giddy on his glamour and fooling themselves: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200804u/obamas-glamour

ADDENDUM: More evidence of boob bait: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/10891

With Johnson on board, I guess this campaign speech won’t be repeated too often, right?

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/obama_to_take_on_mccain_over_b.php

Excerpt:

[i] Some CEOs make more in one day than their workers make in one year. There was a story about this in the paper the other day. They did a study and found that the top 50 CEOs made around $15.7 million last year - despite the fact that many of their companies have been falling behind.

We all believe in that fundamental, American value that if you do good work, if you're successful, you should be rewarded. But if you're a Wall Street CEO today, it doesn'?t seem to matter whether you're doing a good job or a bad job for your shareholders and workers: You'll be rewarded either way.[/i]

Hmmm - Johnson created a bigger financial fiasco than Enron, numbers wise, ditched town to let his successor take the brunt of the fall, all while earning anywhere from 172 to 412 times (note, that’s 17,200% to 41,200% more…) the salary of the average worker at that quasi-governmental entity?

Not that I agree with Obama on CEO salaries - just his normal politics as usual…

ADDENDUM: Kind of like making stuff up: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/06/10/what-use-are-campaign-economists/

As an update, Johnson stepped down so as to not to “distract” the campaign:

[i]Jim Johnson resigns Barack Obama’s vice-presidential search committee.

Everyone and their brother expects the inevitable, “This isn’t the Jim Johnson I once knew.” Once again, we see that Obama’s first instinct when encountering a skeptical questioner is to challenge the questioner; “no, you’re wrong.” Twenty-four hours ago, this was “a game” and Johnson didn’t work for Obama. Once again, as with Wright, and the flag pin, and Trinity United, etc., the initial answer is now inoperative.

Bonus points to my campaign source who said yesterday “it’s only a matter of time before Johnson’s departure, because he costs the candidate a lot more than he benefits him.”

UPDATE: A brilliant question from Campaign Spot reader Tim: “How do you accept the resignation of someone who doesn’t work for you?” [/i]

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/

Judgment.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
As an update, Johnson stepped down so as to not to “distract” the campaign:

[i]Jim Johnson resigns Barack Obama’s vice-presidential search committee.

Everyone and their brother expects the inevitable, “This isn’t the Jim Johnson I once knew.” Once again, we see that Obama’s first instinct when encountering a skeptical questioner is to challenge the questioner; “no, you’re wrong.” Twenty-four hours ago, this was “a game” and Johnson didn’t work for Obama. Once again, as with Wright, and the flag pin, and Trinity United, etc., the initial answer is now inoperative.

Bonus points to my campaign source who said yesterday “it’s only a matter of time before Johnson’s departure, because he costs the candidate a lot more than he benefits him.”

UPDATE: A brilliant question from Campaign Spot reader Tim: “How do you accept the resignation of someone who doesn’t work for you?” [/i]

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/

Judgment.[/quote]

you got to kidding right? mccain is running as a reformer, but his bus is packed with lobbyists, some number of which bailed when the media pointed this out, but still many remain. Again these are key advisors and campaign managers.

vs.
Obama having the gall to pick a person to come up with a list of veeps, who by all accounts has the skill and experience to do exactly that and has nothing else to do with the campaign.

so again if this kind of judgment bothers you, then there is no way in hell you could vote for mccain.

also if johnson bothers mccain surely he’ll be letting Carly Fiorina go anyday now…

On a day when McCain makes another one of his daily gaffes, and trails Obama in the polls, this kind of stuff seems so incredibly phony.

[quote]100meters wrote:

you got to kidding right? mccain is running as a reformer, but his bus is packed with lobbyists, some number of which bailed when the media pointed this out, but still many remain. Again these are key advisors and campaign managers.

vs.
Obama having the gall to pick a person to come up with a list of veeps, who by all accounts has the skill and experience to do exactly that and has nothing else to do with the campaign.

so again if this kind of judgment bothers you, then there is no way in hell you could vote for mccain.

also if johnson bothers mccain surely he’ll be letting Carly Fiorina go anyday now…

On a day when McCain makes another one of his daily gaffes, and trails Obama in the polls, this kind of stuff seems so incredibly phony. [/quote]

Ridiculous. You are nothing but a shill.

Obama the Lightworker has been campaigning expressly against CEO fatcats running off with the goods, and attacked Hillary for having an adviser that was associated with Countryside.

And, in yet another hypocrisy, Obama has chastised McCain for having so many lobbyists on his team.

These are campaign attack points for Obama - only to show he operates by the same rules.

And, more than anything, it was Obama’s reaction that was so troubling - at one point in his bizarre defense of Johnson, he said that Johnson “didn’t work for him”.

Obama is showing cracks in the Responsibility department - and your predictable diatribes of “McCain does it too!” means little when Obama is guilty of the stuff he tries to use against McCain.

“Uh, my team is better than your team” - if you are volunteering to spew mindless bullet DNC points for free, they are still paying you too much.

[quote]100meters wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
As an update, Johnson stepped down so as to not to “distract” the campaign:

[i]Jim Johnson resigns Barack Obama’s vice-presidential search committee.

Everyone and their brother expects the inevitable, “This isn’t the Jim Johnson I once knew.” Once again, we see that Obama’s first instinct when encountering a skeptical questioner is to challenge the questioner; “no, you’re wrong.” Twenty-four hours ago, this was “a game” and Johnson didn’t work for Obama. Once again, as with Wright, and the flag pin, and Trinity United, etc., the initial answer is now inoperative.

Bonus points to my campaign source who said yesterday “it’s only a matter of time before Johnson’s departure, because he costs the candidate a lot more than he benefits him.”

UPDATE: A brilliant question from Campaign Spot reader Tim: “How do you accept the resignation of someone who doesn’t work for you?” [/i]

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/

Judgment.

you got to kidding right? mccain is running as a reformer, but his bus is packed with lobbyists, some number of which bailed when the media pointed this out, but still many remain. Again these are key advisors and campaign managers.

vs.
Obama having the gall to pick a person to come up with a list of veeps, who by all accounts has the skill and experience to do exactly that and has nothing else to do with the campaign.

so again if this kind of judgment bothers you, then there is no way in hell you could vote for mccain.

also if johnson bothers mccain surely he’ll be letting Carly Fiorina go anyday now…

On a day when McCain makes another one of his daily gaffes, and trails Obama in the polls, this kind of stuff seems so incredibly phony. [/quote]

How can you even type this tripe? Aren’t you embarrassed for yourself?

[quote]100meters wrote:

On a day when McCain makes another one of his daily gaffes, and trails Obama in the polls, this kind of stuff seems so incredibly phony. [/quote]

Re: polls, saw the one with registered voters ( http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/WSJ_NBC_SURVEY_June2008.pdf )- come back when they have one with likely voters. Dems have traditionally shown best to worst, in order, with polls of adults, then registered voters, then likely voters. Guess which one does the best job predicting electoral results?

And of course that’s a generic national poll that is not even getting into the EC, which is of course the only thing that matters in a presidential election. It’s also far too early in the campaign - you shouldn’t worry too much about polls done prior to the conventions…

BTW, aren’t you worried that Obama isn’t doing as well as he “should” be doing, given how the nameless GOP candidate polls against the nameless Dem candidate? Just as a general trend, the Obamessiah seems to have problems with Jews (thanks Rev. Wright!), white women overall (thanks Hillary!) and working class male Democrats…

Also, re: the “gaffe,” you’re not referring to the one Kerry tried to point out, are you? ( http://www.johnmccain.com/mccainreport/Read.aspx?guid=8f9f3bc9-aa3a-4aa0-8d05-f1b10d008594 ; http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0608/Speaking_of_confusion.html )

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
100meters wrote:

On a day when McCain makes another one of his daily gaffes, and trails Obama in the polls, this kind of stuff seems so incredibly phony.

Re: polls, saw the one with registered voters ( http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/WSJ_NBC_SURVEY_June2008.pdf )- come back when they have one with likely voters. Dems have traditionally shown best to worst, in order, with polls of adults, then registered voters, then likely voters. Guess which one does the best job predicting electoral results?

And of course that’s a generic national poll that is not even getting into the EC, which is of course the only thing that matters in a presidential election. It’s also far too early in the campaign - you shouldn’t worry too much about polls done prior to the conventions…

BTW, aren’t you worried that Obama isn’t doing as well as he “should” be doing, given how the nameless GOP candidate polls against the nameless Dem candidate? Just as a general trend, the Obamessiah seems to have problems with Jews (thanks Rev. Wright!), white women overall (thanks Hillary!) and working class male Democrats…

Also, re: the “gaffe,” you’re not referring to the one Kerry tried to point out, are you? ( http://www.johnmccain.com/mccainreport/Read.aspx?guid=8f9f3bc9-aa3a-4aa0-8d05-f1b10d008594 ; http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0608/Speaking_of_confusion.html )[/quote]
I forget that polls with Obama ahead surely mean good news for McCain, my bad.

No, not good for McCain - just worthless… which I’m sure you knew…

It’s easy to forget that only a few months ago, we were assured of two things: Hillary would be the Democratic nominee and Iraq was lost. Both of those are obviously wrong - don’t count those chickens before they’ve hatched…