"They're Attacking Me Because I'm White!"

[Matt]

Clinton's guilty of the same crap, dude. "Shame on you Barack Obama!" meanwhile she's running a letter in New Hampshire that completely distorts his position on abortion as well as mailers in Wisconsin and Ohio that distort his position on health care (just like his health care mailer). Play the victim while you're doing the exact same junk.

What the hell is wrong with you redfirebird? I SAID CLINTON IS DIRTY NUMEROUS TIMES! Believe it or not, Hillary Clinton's shortcomings do not justify Barack Obama's. Clinton is a merciless *****, we get it. That doesn't make it ok for Barack Obama to be a passive aggressive *******. Especially when he is the one trying to act as if he is on a high horse. So news flash: Any time someone questions Obama's moral authority, you pointing out Hillary Clinton and John McCain's shortcomings do not make the questions about Obama's disappear.

 

[redfirebird2008]

What the hell is wrong with you redfirebird? I SAID CLINTON IS DIRTY NUMEROUS TIMES! Believe it or not, Hillary Clinton's shortcomings do not justify Barack Obama's. Clinton is a merciless *****, we get it. That doesn't make it ok for Barack Obama to be a passive aggressive *******.

Pshhhh...you lose elections if you don't use some kind of dirty politics at some point. It's just a fact. Obama's full of crap when he says he's a new kind of politician. He can't be. Otherwise he can't survive.

 

[Matt]

I'm just going to post this again for the page change because I feel it is an important point to this discussion that is going overlooked so people can continue to talk about Clinton leaking Obama pictures.

The absolute hypocrisy of some Barack Obama supporters is mind boggling. People have been saying for MONTHS Clinton is where she is because she shares a bed with Bill, yet I have never seen Souvlaki complain that those kinds of comments take away from Clinton's numerous accomplishments (a degree from Yale Law, endless work for children charities, etc). No one has complained about people "marginalizing" Hillary Clinton though.

And frankly, I think that is a good thing. We SHOULD be asking these questions. Does a half-a-term Senator really have what it takes to lead the free world? Does Clinton really have the qualifications outside of banging Bill? Is Obama getting a free pass because he is black? Clinton because she is a woman and an ex-President's wife? These kinds of questions SHOULD be asked. We are giving these candidates absolutely ZERO scrutiny. And scrutiny isn't deciding between Clinton and Obama. Has anyone stopped to think that we quite possibly gave the two WORST, LEAST QUALIFIED candidates for the job a free pass to the final stage of the interview process? That is like hiring a CEO of a fortune 500 company and skipping over all of the people with MBAs, pulling two people out of the mailroom and saying "Alright, its down to the two of you. Wow me." Its not racist to suggest that Obama may have gotten a free pass from the media and the public because he is black. Nor is it sexist to suggest that Clinton got a free pass due to her gender or husband. These are questions that need to be asked before selecting a president or our democracy will fail. Sure, everyone has a right to vote, but democracy is about responsibility too and people have forgotten all about that by endlessly promoting these two rockstar candidates.

I used to be that way. I voted for John Kerry in 2004. I vocally defended him and his stances. I regret the hell out of that. Very few of his beliefs were in line with mine. I voted party instead of my conscience. That was a mistake. I should've voted third party because neither candidate was up to scratch as appears to be the case in this upcoming election. Giving real thought and scrutiny is not a bad thing and it should never be thought of as such. Anyone saying that it is racist to suggest Obama got a free pass due to his race should be ashamed of themselves. It is no different than Bush's with us or against us tactics. These are the kinds of questions we HAVE TO ASK before giving anyone a chance to sit in our highest office.


I give Zen, an Obama supporter, a lot of credit for admitting that the media let him have a pass on several issues because of his color. I mean, it is pretty obvious if you just take off the partisan blinders and look at what is going on.

 

[Matt]

Pshhhh...you lose elections if you don't use some kind of dirty politics at some point. It's just a fact. Obama's full of crap when he says he's a new kind of politician. He can't be. Otherwise he can't survive.

So you are admitting that he is both a liar and a hypocrite, but it is somehow okay when he does it, but wrong when Hillary Clinton or John McCain does it?

 

[Marx]

no there isn't, but when confronted with it they did not deny it. her campaign manager even tried attacking him over it. which misstatements are you referring to? i know there was some hub-bub about her stance on NAFTA, but what else?

NAFTA and her healthcare plan among others. The flyers that were spread around Ohio (that I received in the mail) completely and deliberately distorted her record. So if we're going to accuse people of playing from the "Republican Playbook," I'm just saying - let's be fair. With regard to that photo, Hillary completely denounced it and said that she was unaware of its origin. (And very forcefully I might add.) Now people can say "of course she would say that," but what more do people want her to do? It seems to me that there are some people who want Hillary to gravel for things that (she may or may not have done,) but are completely fine with Barack pulling the same kind of tactics.

 

[redfirebird2008]

So you are admitting that he is both a liar and a hypocrite, but it is somehow okay when he does it, but wrong when Hillary Clinton or John McCain does it?

A liar? I never called either McCain or Clinton liars, so I'm not sure why you're calling Obama a liar. He's a hypocrite, definitely.

 

[souvlaki]

So you call playing dirty and being able to play it off as if its your opponents fault as "charasmatic?" My friend, we have very different views on what charisma is and I suggest you consult a dictionary.

I do consider it a form of charisma if he is capable of being dirty and come off looking okay as being charismatic. Like I said, Bill Clinton was a master at this. So was John F. Kennedy. Besides, Obama is kind of put in a bad position in this respect. If he does nothing, people say he is being weak. If he fights back people say he is not the hope and change candidate he claims to be. When your opponent is basically throwing anything they can at you do you expect Obama to just sit there and take it? He's going to have to play it a little dirty if he wants to win the nomination. They have both been going after eachother on non-issues, because the second they start pointing out flaws in the other's stances on the issues, they begin pointing out flaws in their own.

 

[Marx]

What the hell is wrong with you redfirebird? I SAID CLINTON IS DIRTY NUMEROUS TIMES! Believe it or not, Hillary Clinton's shortcomings do not justify Barack Obama's. Clinton is a merciless *****, we get it. That doesn't make it ok for Barack Obama to be a passive aggressive *******. Especially when he is the one trying to act as if he is on a high horse. So news flash: Any time someone questions Obama's moral authority, you pointing out Hillary Clinton and John McCain's shortcomings do not make the questions about Obama's disappear.

That's the point I'm trying to make.

 

[Matt]

A liar? I never called either McCain or Clinton liars, so I'm not sure why you're calling Obama a liar. He's a hypocrite, definitely.

To say you do one thing while you do another is a lie. That makes you a.....(wait for it).....LIAR!

 

[redfirebird2008]

NAFTA and her healthcare plan among others. The flyers that were spread around Ohio (that I received in the mail) completely and deliberately distorted her record. So if we're going to accuse people of playing from the "Republican Playbook," I'm just saying - let's be fair. With regard to that photo, Hillary completely denounced it and said that she was unaware of its origin. (And very forcefully I might add.) Now people can say "of course she would say that," but what more do people want her to do? It seems to me that there are some people who want Hillary to gravel for things that (she may or may not have done,) but are completely fine with Barack pulling the same kind of tactics.

Because as far as I know, Obama hasn't sent a mailer that plays the gender card, which is what Hillary did in New Hampshire when she sent a letter to women that portrayed Obama as a Republican on abortion -- a total distortion. In fact, many of the women that endorsed and signed the letter (powerful feminist groups) have recanted and admitted they did not even read the letter before signing it. One of them even switched her support to Obama and denounced Hillary's tactics on this issue. It was straight up gender-baiting. Negative mailers on health care are dirty, and she's guilty of it too. But something like abortion is a bit different though because it's a specific and personal issue to many women. Obama's a hypocrite, there's no doubt of that. He's sent negative mailers, which I do consider dirty politics while trying to say he's a new politician. Total BS.

 

[Matt]

I do consider it a form of charisma if he is capable of being dirty and come off looking okay as being charismatic. Like I said, Bill Clinton was a master at this. So was John F. Kennedy. Besides, Obama is kind of put in a bad position in this respect. If he does nothing, people say he is being weak. If he fights back people say he is not the hope and change candidate he claims to be. When your opponent is basically throwing anything they can at you do you expect Obama to just sit there and take it? He's going to have to play it a little dirty if he wants to win the nomination. They have both been going after eachother on non-issues, because the second they start pointing out flaws in the other's stances on the issues, they begin pointing out flaws in their own.

Its not a form of charisma, not by a long shot. Again, look up the definition of charisma. Hell, if anything it makes him a good liar.

As for him being "put in a bad position" he wasn't put there, HE CHOSE TO GO THERE. He created this false image of himself and now he has to live with it.

 

[Marx]

Because as far as I know, Obama hasn't sent a mailer that plays the gender card, which is what Hillary did in New Hampshire when she sent a letter to women that portrayed Obama as a Republican on abortion -- a total distortion. In fact, many of the women that endorsed and signed the letter (powerful feminist groups) have recanted and admitted they did not even read the letter before signing it. One of them even switched her support to Obama and denounced Hillary's tactics on this issue. It was straight up gender-baiting. Negative mailers on health care are dirty, and she's guilty of it too. But something like abortion is a bit different though because it's a specific and personal issue to many women. Obama's a hypocrite, there's no doubt of that. He's sent negative mailers, which I do consider dirty politics while trying to say he's a new politician. Total BS.

That's all I'm trying to say Firebird. And I just get really sick and tired of people condemning Hillary for the same types of things that Barack is getting away with.

 

[Marx]

Its not a form of charisma, not by a long shot. Again, look up the definition of charisma. Hell, if anything it makes him a good liar.

As for him being "put in a bad position" he wasn't put there, HE CHOSE TO GO THERE. He created this false image of himself and now he has to live with it.

I have zero sympathy for him. He put himself in the position that he finds himself in. He has no one to blame but himself.

 

[souvlaki]

So you are admitting that he is both a liar and a hypocrite, but it is somehow okay when he does it, but wrong when Hillary Clinton or John McCain does it?

Find me a President that hasn't been a liar and a hypocrite at some point. Obama isn't perfect, but he's been more presidential than the other two candidates thus far. He's still making more of an attempt to appeal to peoples' hopes and aspirations for this country then his other two opponents and that is something I do consider important in a leader.

 

[redfirebird2008]

That's all I'm trying to say Firebird. And I just get really sick and tired of people condemning Hillary for the same types of things that Barack is getting away with.

You mean like the 3 AM ad? That reached a hell of a lot more people than the mailers sent by Clinton and Obama. That's the thing here. Obama has played this very smart as far as going dirty. He does it in mailers, which is a traditional style of politics (and Hillary does it as well), but he avoids the negative TV ads. In today's YouTube world and with the 24-hour cable news, they tend to be very biased towards TV ads. Since Obama never runs negative TV ads, it gives a more positive impression to many people even as he's running negative mailers. I wonder if he stopped running those negative mailers after she called him out on it though? I know I didn't get anything from either candidate here in Texas.

 

[Matt]

Find me a President that hasn't been a liar and a hypocrite at some point. Obama isn't perfect, but he's been more presidential than the other two candidates thus far. He's still making more of an attempt to appeal to peoples' hopes and aspirations for this country then his other two opponents and that is something I do consider important in a leader.

Then don't try to portray yourself as perfect. When you say one thing and do another, you are a hypocrite. Plain and simple. Is the best defense you really have "Well, at least he is ACTING presidential even if he isn't living up to the standard?"

 

[Marx]

You mean like the 3 AM ad? That reached a hell of a lot more people than the mailers sent by Clinton and Obama. That's the thing here. Obama has played this very smart as far as going dirty. He does it in mailers, which is a traditional style of politics (and Hillary does it as well), but he avoids the negative TV ads. In today's YouTube world and with the 24-hour cable news, they tend to be very biased towards TV ads. Since Obama never runs negative TV ads, it gives a more positive impression to many people even as he's running negative mailers. I wonder if he stopped running those negative mailers after she called him out on it though? I know I didn't get anything from either candidate here in Texas.

That's what I want to know. Here in Ohio, negative mailers were all over the place. I obviously am not getting them now because our primary is over, but I would love to know if the mailer tactics are continuing in other states. (Especially in Pennsylvania.) If anyone knows, please post it!

 

[redfirebird2008]

I'm pretty sure Hillary will stay on the attack (including with mailers) because she's behind and it worked in Ohio and Texas. But I am very curious to see if Obama is going to stop running them now that he got called out by her.

 

[souvlaki]

Its not a form of charisma, not by a long shot. Again, look up the definition of charisma. Hell, if anything it makes him a good liar.

As for him being "put in a bad position" he wasn't put there, HE CHOSE TO GO THERE. He created this false image of himself and now he has to live with it.

You dont think playing the political game, and being dirty, but still coming off likable doesn't require a bit of charisma?

Name me a good president that didn't base his campaign on running a different sort of politics, or a good president that didn't speak of hope, and change. Or bringing the country together. Crossing partisan lines. Now name me a president that didn't attack from time to time when he was backed into a corner by his opponent. Or a president that never got his hands dirty when he needed to. Every politician is a hypocrite in some fashion, and I dont think Obama is any more of a hypocrite than any other politician that has ever lived. He shouldn't be held to any higher a standard than any other politician that has said similar things in the past.

 

[Matt]

You dont think playing the political game, and being dirty, but still coming off likable doesn't require a bit of charisma?

Name me a good president that didn't base his campaign on running a different sort of politics, or a good president that didn't speak of hope, and change. Or bringing the country together. Crossing partisan lines. Now name me a president that didn't attack from time to time when he was backed into a corner by his opponent. Or a president that never got his hands dirty when he needed to. Every politician is a hypocrite in some fashion, and I dont think Obama is any more of a hypocrite than any other politician that has ever lived. He shouldn't be held to any higher a standard than any other politician that has said similar things in the past.

He SHOULD be held to a higher standard because HE created one for himself. He put himself on a pedestal and now he will have to live with the consequences of it.

 

[Marx]

You dont think playing the political game, and being dirty, but still coming off likable doesn't require a bit of charisma?

Name me a good president that didn't base his campaign on running a different sort of politics, or a good president that didn't speak of hope, and change. Or bringing the country together. Crossing partisan lines. Now name me a president that didn't attack from time to time when he was backed into a corner by his opponent. Or a president that never got his hands dirty when he needed to. Every politician is a hypocrite in some fashion, and I dont think Obama is any more of a hypocrite than any other politician that has ever lived. He shouldn't be held to any higher a standard than any other politician that has said similar things in the past.

That being said Souv, Obama is the one that has placed himself "so high up and far above the fray" that it's ridiculous. I cannot think of one politician that put him or herself in such a ridiculous Catch22 position as Obama has.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Consequences? You mean winning the presidency? LOL. The thing that will definitely happen is a big letdown when he becomes President (if he does). I'm sure he would be a good President, but there's no way in hell he'll live up to his promises -- just like JFK didn't live up to his promises and would have been remembered as a pretty bad President if he hadn't gotten assassinated.

 

[Matt]

Consequences? You mean winning the presidency? LOL. The thing that will definitely happen is a big letdown when he becomes President (if he does). I'm sure he would be a good President, but there's no way in hell he'll live up to his promises -- just like JFK didn't live up to his promises and would have been remembered as a pretty bad President if he hadn't gotten assassinated.

The consequences are he can't really attack his opponents in this campaign or he will have to deal with being called out as being a hypocrite. He is in a position where he can't really directly attack anyone, which as Souvalki has said, makes it hard to win.

 

[redfirebird2008]

The consequences are he can't really attack his opponents in this campaign or he will have to deal with being called out as being a hypocrite. He is in a position where he can't really directly attack anyone, which as Souvalki has said, makes it hard to win.

We'll see how it goes. McCain claims he won't run a negative campaign against the Dem nominee. As long as it's not coming from McCain himself, I don't think Obama would have that much trouble. He will be fighting all kinds of junk about his name, etc. from the 527's.

 

[souvlaki]

He SHOULD be held to a higher standard because HE created one for himself. He put himself on a pedestal and now he will have to live with the consequences of it.

So has every other politician that has put themselves on that pedestal. Just in the last forty years Clinton, Reagan and Kennedy come to mind. Personally I feel he's managed to get dirty from time to time, but he's been far more presidential about it then his opponents. Like I said, if he says or does nothing, he's seen as weak. If he does something, he's a hypocrite.