Hey, He Just Pressed the Wrong Button
By NoQuarter on March 3, 2008 at 11:37 PM in Barack Obama, Commander in Chief, Flag officers, Hillary Clinton
Okay, he did it a bunch of times … but hey, no big deal.
Like I keep saying, it’s no wonder that generals and admirals are rallying to Hillary Clinton. This twit must scare the bejeezus out of them. (”Michelle my belle, where did you put the football?! Oh there it is…. now, which button do I push? They told me but, hey, I’m an absent-minded professor type. You’re always razzin’ me for not putting the butter away, for not retying the bread wrapper, for not makin’ the bed right. My head’s just not in these, uh, details. Kids, do you remember?” “Oh, daddy. It’s this one.” Take it away, HoosierHoops or others …)
It reminds me of a blog post a pal sent along earlier today: “Let’s Hope Obama Doesn’t Press the Wrong Button If He’s President.”
Oh, please. Give me the “Activity Girl” instead:
Want some reading with those snacks?
Try out Eriposte’s brilliant rant today at LeftCoaster (I especially love the part about the NIE):
First, NAFTA. I hadn’t bothered to write about the CTV story about the alleged comments of one of Obama’s top advisors Austan Goolsbee to Canadian officials because I believed the blanket denials of the Obama campaign that no such meeting ever took place during the stated timeframe where trade policy/NAFTA was discussed. Now, the AP has obtained a memo that was distributed within the Canadian Government which documents the discussion during a meeting with Goolsbee on February 8th. So, why would the Obama campaign deceive the public about this meeting - something they must have known they might get called on easily? Sure, they are challenging the accuracy of the portion of the memo that is unfavorable to them, but after having believed their previous denials, let’s just say I’m not about to believe their latest denial.
Second, foreign policy and judgment. Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson has another piece up on the Huffington Post taking on Sen. Obama’s foreign policy "judgment". On a related topic, both Sen. Obama and David Axelrod made stuff up during the weekend about one of the Senators supporting Sen. Obama (Jay Rockefeller) who they claimed voted against the AUMF after reading the NIE. Actually, he voted for the AUMF. Frankly, I find Sen. Obama’s whole misleading attack on Sen. Clinton using the NIE to be nothing less than crass politics, to say the least. He himself said on more than one occasion that Democrats who were aware of the intelligence that he never saw might have had valid reasons to vote for the AUMF. On top of that he himself never read the NIE before proclaiming what was or what wasn’t the case in Iraq in Oct 2002. So, if someone could have great "judgment" without reading the NIE, then according to Sen. Obama’s Rules for the Democratic PrimaryTM, why in the world would anyone else need to read the NIE? I have had enough with this nonsense from Sen. Obama about the Supreme ImportanceTM of reading the NIE when he was the one actually making proclamations of certainty - the kind of certainty that even the UN did not have in Oct 2002 - without reading the NIE. If he keeps on with this farce, I will be forced to keep reminding everyone about an actual President who didn’t wait to read the NIE before declaring his certainty about what was or what wasn’t the case in Iraq. Let me throw Sen. Obama’s sentiment right back at him - his declarations of certainty in Oct 2002 without reading the NIE will never, in my view, be proof of "good judgment". Good luck and good guessing perhaps, but NOT "good judgment". Certainly not from a person who displayed Great JudgmentTM by declaring the following in 2001:
“…I dont think that soon-to-be-Secretary Rumsfeld is in any way out of the mainstream of American political life. And I would argue that the same would be true for the vast majority of the Bush nominees, and I give him credit for that.”
You know I’m free, free now baby
I’m free from your spell
I’m free, free now
I’m free from your spell
And now that it’s over
All I can do is wish you well
– B.B. King
Oh, thank you God!!!
Who has been Swiftboating Obama, the Canadian Memo, where did that come from and who called Goolsbe and set him up? Who pushed up Rezko’s trial which was to start much later this year? Why did Somali picture come out, along with Farrakahn endoresement and mocking of his middle name? We have to ask these things? Who does not want to give unity and hope a chance? Is this part of the Kitchen Sink or may be the Basement? I do know its dirty politics and until we reject this kind of politicking in America we will be a pawn in their hands, the people of power, and never find our true Independence which Obama is offering. The Evil Ones are just getting started. Someone is trying to pull our strings. The Truth will come out. Hopefully, America we can see through this Rouse this time and elect CHANGE!
The Republicans would love to run against Hillary. They have so much dirt in their Arsenal waiting to be Unleashed!
Ah, Swiftboating is when something said about someone is a LIE. It is not DIRTY politics to point out when someone does something that isn’t kosher. Complain all you will and that’s your right, but please don’t lie about it. You believe in your candidate and many millions of us believe in Hillary Clinton. That’s our right.
And please, do grow up. The “change” line has been used by politicians for generations. They, the politicians, are always going to change everything. Unfortunately, few things are changed. Certainly not by a bunch of people chanting “yes we can.”
Democracy is hard and depressing work. Issues, not slogans are important. For every inch forward, the rich and powerful try to force us back. If Senator Obama and his supporters can’t take the heat, they need to get out of the kitchen and make way for someone that can. Because you ain’t even begun to see “dirty politics” yet.
Hear Hear!
For Hillary: The toughest steel is made from the hottest fire!
When it gets heated Obama walks out; Hillary stands her ground and waits for the heat to subside.
GO HILL GO!
Let me throw Sen. Obama’s sentiment right back at him - his declarations of certainty in Oct 2002 without reading the NIE will never, in my view, be proof of “good judgment”.
Uh, except that he was, you know, right, like a lot of us were, whereas she 1. was in a position to read the NIE, 2. was told by a fellow Senator that he was voting no based on the NIE and that she should read it, 3. chose not to read it and 4. voted the wrong way.
Having read the NIE was perhaps a sufficient condition for having a correct understanding, but a lot of us dirty smelly hippies were able to make the correct judgement even without reading it. And we weren’t just right, we were right for the right reasons. Our predictions have been borne out in hideous detail.
Again, we were right, and she. was. wrong.
And you’re telling a large part of the electorate that they are all stupid for having believed Colin Powell when he spoke at the UN…I was one of those anti-war people who happened to have believed Colin Powell and gritted my teeth when we invaded Iraq…I also believe and trust Hillary when she says listen to the statement I made prior to my yes vote…she had assurances that the inspectors would be given a chance to complete their mission…that invasion would be the LAST step…Hans Blix told congress that a strong bipartisan vote for authorization was the only way to get the inspectors back into Iraq and to avoid a full out war. So, you know, there are those of us who have our own informed opinions, and you need to give us some credit for those as I give you for yours.
In America politics today, pundits and media reward politicians and say how smart they are when the politician uses Bully tactics and an “Swiftboat” mentality when they tear their opponents down by smear, distortions and lies –”swift boating”. The news media and pundits like to Praise the unscrupulous Politician up instead of disavowing them. The pundits like to say how Brilliant they are; What a Victory they say; what a Comeback Kid; and justify their use of Negative Ads and reward the worst in us — this low and base behavior which should be outgrown as a humanitarian society. How many good and decent men have gone down because they were unfairly swiftboated by their opponents, mischaracaterized by those who have no morals or ethics. Something is wrong with that picture.
There is nothing brilliant about lies, distortions, peddling fear, swiftboating, and an assassination of one’s character, it’s not a physical killing but a killing just the same, an emotional theft and mental crime. It’s slander and distortion of the worse kind and should not be rewarded or esteemed as characteristics we need to emulate within our society. Do we emulate the school yard bully? Or the thief who steals one’s life’s earnings? It’s Dirty Politics and should be called what it is, a crime. If America is to ever become better than what she is, than we must disavow this kind of tactics because it has no place in Democracy’s arms, no place in a sane and peaceful society.
Running a country is serious business and it is not a game, it is not acting. It’s the governing of people and their lives and should be taken as a solemn oath and duty. Dirty politics should not be looked up to as a virtue and politicians should not be allowed to swiftboat their opponent, for the sake of gain by any means at any cost.
There is a Right way to Fight and a Wrong way to Fight. Victory based on lies and cheating should not be condoned. There should be campaign laws about this kind of unscrupulous politicking. It should not be rewarded with the highest office in the land. It should be called what it is a Crime.
America is only as good as her politicians and leaders.
Right Wing Canadian Prime Minister Tied to Leak Slurring Obama
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_rob_kall_080304_oen_nails_right_wing.htm
You really do need to grow up. Your comment evidences a lack of U.S.historical and political knowledge that are essential to casting an informed (not emotional) vote. I would guess that you are yet another Obama supporter who cannot name a single accomplishment of his.
I am sick and tired of losing elections because too many ignorant and naive people vote. Like my mother used to say…”use your head for something other than a hat rack.”
I can name many of Obama’s accomplishments: 8 Years in State Senate, Ethic’s Reform, Loose Nuclear Nukes, health-care reform, telecommunications’ reform, and much, much more and did not vote for Iraq War and Opposed it.
I would rather talk about Hillary’s accomplishments instead of talking about the lack of the same for Mr. Obama. BUT…
You may want to look at his state record a little more closely. He was in a Republican controlled state congress for the first 7 of 8 years. As far as I know, he accomplished little and was NOT able to work across party lines as he likes to tout.
Now, when the Illinois State Senate finally fell into Democratic control during his last year, an old party Democratic leader decided to be a king-maker. This guy (can’t remember his name, sorry) took legislation that other Senators had been working on for years away from them and gave it to Obama to build up his record, to make it look good for a National contest. If I find the link, I’ll come back and provide it.
Mr. Obama likes to take credit for some Nuclear Leak legislation he says he passed. Well, the bill NEVER passed and I don’t even think it came up for a vote in the full senate. After Exelon (one of his biggest supporters, BTW) got hold of the bill, it was VERY watered down and made the mandatory reporting only “voluntary” on the part of the Nuclear plants. But he says on the stump that he passed this legislation.
So, as far as this dirty campaigning you’re talking about, I think misrepresenting not only your opponent’s record, but likewise, your own is DIRTY. Twisting comments and/or taking them out of context is DIRTY (i.e., BC’s so-called racist SC comments). Sending out bogus mailers that could potentially undermine our ability to achieve a core Democratic principle that everyone deserves healthcare is DIRTY.
I don’t think bringing up the fact that Mr. Obama is NOT vetted is dirty politics. Afterall, he is the guy who says he is the only candidate that will win against McCain (even though the latest polls show him losing to McCain and Hillary winning now). Mr. Obama uses that to try to convince voters/superdelegates to go with him. Hillary needs to demonstrate that this argument for voting Obama is not a good one. The Republicans will show no mercy when it comes to anything Obama. They will bring up Rezco, MiddleEast ties…naftagate…state senate record…
I want to know that the Democratic nominee can withstand the Republican slime machine…If Mr. Obama can’t even stand ONE WEEK of MSM scrutiny, how in the world will he be able to go up against the Republicans? And, YES, the MSM has been VERY kind to Obama up to this point…I haven’t watched the tube for months because all I see is one-sided, misogynistic, Hillary hate.
Here’s the link to the State Senate record:
http://www.illinoistimes.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A3015
On a related topic, both Sen. Obama and David Axelrod made stuff up during the weekend about one of the Senators supporting Sen. Obama (Jay Rockefeller) who they claimed voted against the AUMF after reading the NIE. Actually, he voted for the AUMF.
Hey, good point, except that Rockefeller wasn’t the chairman of the SSCI at the time, though. Bob Graham was, and voted nay, according to the same vote count you link to.
You might want to consider whether all of your evaluations of Obama are based on similar hasty inferences.
This is Axelrod’s word on MTP…they just couldn’t get their facts straight, and what he said is a lie…really no need to defend this.
“Senator Jay Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who opposed the war in Iraq, who read the intelligence before the war, which Senator Clinton concedes she did not, and who said that Barack Obama has the judgment and the maturity and the vision to lead,” he said.
Accused of murdering three men and a dog, you produce the dog unharmed?
Your only complaint at this point is that one of Obama’s spokespeople got a name wrong. This doesn’t alter the fact that the Democratic Chairman of the SSCI voted no on the AUMF, told Senator Clinton how he was voting and why, that she did not take his advice and read the NIE, and that she voted the wrong way.
Proportion, man, proportion.
It’s not just one spokesperson got it wrong. Obama himself in a campaign rally also said the same thing.
“Jay Rockefeller read it, but she didn’t read it. I don’t know where all that experience got her because I have enough experience to know that if you have a national intelligence estimate and the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee says, ‘you should read this, that’s why I voted against the war,’ then you should probably read it.”
I understand other senile person might mix things up, but the very young, intelligent, brilliant Senator from Illinois?
And didn’t you get the point of Obama camp’s argument? What the Obama campaign tried to prove is somebody read the intel report, with all the information, voted against the war. But the fact is there are people who read it and voted for the war, namely Jay Rockefeller. This effectively disqualified their argument.
No it doesn’t. To shift to a less contentious context, you might make a bad investment even if you gather all the information you possibly can. I presume you wouldn’t say this destroys the argument that informing yourself is better than not informing yourself. If you have a friend, who has experience with similar financial decisions, and he tells you that he’s read Source X, and it contains information leading him to invest elsewhere, and you blow off this advice and invest anyway, subsequently losing all your money, aren’t you going to feel just a little foolish?
Now if we shift back to a decision involving, not your money, but the lives of thousands of soldiers, ….
I’m glad it’s not that nuclear football button he’s got his finger on
Are you watching Nightline?
It’s a special interview on Obama…..
Regarding the National Security issue he says Clinton’s questions are because..
“Clinton is getting desperate at teh end of the campaign”
He says one of the reasons he is best suited for
making decisions as President is that he “doesn’t get rattled”
as he has “demostrated in the campaign”
I think Nightline is helping Obama here, big time….
Bush doesn’t get rattled either.
Those quotes sound delusional rather than helpful to me. The momentum is with Hillary now.
They report that 2 millon people have voted
in Texas already….
I am not sure I heard right but I think she
said 60% of the
electorate. That might be bad for Clinton b/c
these voters made their
decisions before all the recent events *finally*
started to get reported and
when Obama was still riding high with the Media
out of the string of primary wins….
What do you think?
I believe most of the polls have them dead even with the early voters, or her about 2 pts ahead. It isn’t great, but it also means that he is not really too far ahead of her, or at least it doesn’t seem that way, so she may be able to widen her lead tomorrow which could be enough to win. She needs to majorly GOTV in South Texas, she needs to open up bigger leads in East Texas, and do better in North Texas and West Texas, where I believe she is somewhat behind right now…she also needs to do better with men.
However, if the polls are accurate about the Latino vote, that it is breaking for her by 20-30 points,a nd she can drive up Latino voting to around 40 percent (not at all sure that she could do it… but just saying) she would win the popular vote.
Hahahahahahahahaa. I remember when I first read this article in the LA Times I could barely believe it. I laughed really hard and then I almost cried as I thought about the fact that THIS IS THE BEST EXCUSE HE COULD COME UP WITH??? And then I saw this clip and even Shuster nailed him for it and I thought it might stick (because this is something that I think, had the press run with it, could have defined him) but they never went back to it, and as far as I know, no one but the LA Time and this one segment of Joe even bothered to report it.
Yeah, how lame… He should be embarrased if true.
But I find it pretty incredible…
Now you know the real reason Schuster got suspended. He almost blew the narrative.
Moran and Tapper are hitting hard on Clinton
after a sweet dance with Obama…
Oh gawd. Their investigative guy Brian Ross does a great story today on Rezko, and they can’t put it on Nightline? WTF.
on what Andy?
On her playing people fears, her unreadiness in Texas, not knowing the delegate rules, trying hard to attack Obama as a last resort tactic; etc etc
They did want to give the impression she “was desperate”.
And then of course how great Obama is on the ground. This is
all after a segment of a live interview with Obama letting him
trash all of Clinton’s questions as “she being desperate”.There was no live comments from Clinton.
Now George S. keeps making teh argument she has to suspend her campaign unless she wins “decisively” which won’t happen so they are mounting pressure already.
No comments at all from George S. about Nafta-gate or Rezko.
Only two very short vague references at the begining of the program intertwined with Obama live interview dismissing everything as “Clinton spins”….
The last part of Nightline:
First they reprot on the pressure from some in the party for her to drop if she doesn’t win big. But then the say the people/democrats think very differently.
They show a poll about whether democrats think she should drop if she loses either Texas or Ohio:
79% said NO (she should NOT drop) and when asked whether she should drop if she loses both then it was closer to 50% –50%
That’s good at least.
I meant “they report”
Nightline.
Well sure he hit the wrong button a few times, he was high on “hopedope” at the time
OTHER LISA visited Eriposte’s thread at LeftCoaster (see my story for the quote and link):
I was looking at the comment thread on the Eriposte post and saw this one:
“It is fascinating that every comment in Obama’s political career and every vote of his is subject to the Famous Rule of the 2008 Election - W.O.R.M. (What Obama Really Meant) or some aspect thereof. In contrast, no such nuance or qualification is allowed when it comes to the statements or votes of Sen. Clinton during her political career. If Obama voted on Bills to continue the war in Iraq, it was because he didn’t intend to continue the war, he was just, um, trying to do the right thing by our soldiers and such and was really “anti-war”. If Clinton says she voted for AUMF not because she intended to support pre-emptive war but to force an inspections regime on Saddam, of course her intentions don’t matter - only the ultimate vote counts. The Clinton Double Standard is clear.”
…..
Posted by eriposte at March 3, 2008 08:50 AM”
I LOVE W.O.R.M. - a much better way of putting what I’ve been trying to say.
He hit the wrong button? This is getting beyond ridiculous — who exactly decided that this man should be president? Talk about a kitchen sink strategy, he will throw whatever lie first pops into his head if he thinks it will stop the pesky questions. I’ve been thinking for about a week now that it feels as if there has been some sort of shift, that perhaps some of the scrutiny that Obama is finally getting has altered the landscape and all of the “inevitability” talk has been, to say the least, premature. My hope is that even if Hillary doesn’t win both TX and OH tomorrow that she performs well enough to stay in the race. I really do think that with a little more time, more and more people are going to clue-in to what a joke an Obama presidency would be.
On another note, I watched the Activity Girl video — does anybody know if Joan Jett has actually endorsed Hillary? I traveled with her a little bit in Iowa when she was stumping for Dean — she is way cool.
I sure hope the activity girl hit the wrong button when she voted AGAINST a ban on the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas? Or was that Hill caring for the kids?
2 votes for the Iraq war and a vote for cluster bombs…war hawky! No wonder the military generals love her.
There’s ol’ dougy with his unity hug again.
Hi doug! luv u back!
Susan or Larry,
Have either of you followed the link to the LA Times article about him pressing the wrong button and read the whole article?
I ask because I noticed something when the article was first published and I wonder why the press hasn’t picked up on it. Maybe if you made a stink of it someone would care.
But two of Obama’s bumbles came on more-sensitive topics. On Nov. 14, 1997, he backed legislation to permit riverboat casinos to operate even when the boats were dockside. The measure, pushed by the gambling industry and fought by church groups whose support Obama was seeking, passed with two “yeas” to spare — including Obama’s. Moments after its passage he rose to say, “I’d like to be recorded as a no vote,” explaining that he had mistakenly voted for it.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obamavotes24jan24,1,7079399.story
Now, we could take Sen. Obama at his word and say it was a mistake but do you know who was a person pushing for that measure?
But when Rezko pushed for passage in Springfield of a major gambling measure, Obama vocally opposed it.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-rezkojan23,0,3964061.story
Ummm, he vocally opposed the measure that Rezko was pushing after he accidentally voted for it. Are we really suppose to believe that? Considering that Rezko and Obama were friends?
he’ll murdered on this. twittery.
Welcome to Illinois!! This is how things are done in my state. Its crooked as hell but for some strange reason, we take pride in it, and I’m not kidding. Other people see these moves and are horrified. Here in Illinois, we laugh and tell the person, “nice one”, or, “I’m going to have to remember that move.”
I said the day Obama announced I would not vote for him because (1) he’s from IL, and (2) and even worse, Emil Jones was his mentor. Words can not describe how dirty, underhanded, and two-faced Emil Jones is, and he taught Barack. It shows!!
“I’m gunna make me a US Senator!” — Emil Jones, Jr. (2002)
And Hillary supports McCain over Obama.
“I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002,” Clinton says.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Clinton_on_Obama_and_McCain.html
Is this not a true statement? Based on experience?
Just on the age numbers alone this is a true statement…
Obama does not have the first clue on this point.
If Senator Clinton would really prefer to see John McCain elected president than Barack Obama, perhaps she should consider changing parties. McCain is unambiguously a Republican, not a Republican Lite — he even embraces, literally, George W. Bush.
Hillary Clinton shows here that she does not give a rat’s ass about the Democratic party, and should she win in November, you can expect a decline in Democratic fortunes similar to that which accompanied her husband’s tenure in office.
Or maybe she doesn’t really mean it, and she’s just getting hysterical — it’s my Party and I’ll cry if I want to.
See, the problem for the unsophisticated is they don’t understand by bashing Clinton is this manner, the cheap easy shot of Kos, say, the halfassed wannabe who thinks he’s a player in his own little town, anyway, the problem with this is Obama still has to function in the political and business (and criminal) world.
And he’ll be shunned, on his way to prison to prison with Blagojevich, with no network like Scooter Libby to help him out, because of all this cheap childish shots. And I know it’s your troll, Neb, but this is also your reality, and everyone can see it, but you.
You hurt yourself, as there ARE consequences.
You make Obama look bad, and you are genuinely hurting him , or your employer, when you speak in this manner.
Why do you think Bush had it so bad?
Do you know what blue flu is?
it’s like that.
I’m beginning to think Obama has difficulty ascertaining reality, a difficult time assessing and determining the true factors and conditions he needs to negotiate, to win.
It’s not HALO, it’s real.
Wow.
Obama could be even worse than I thought, in terms of his mental health.
I wonder if anyone has checked to see if he has a prior psychiatric history?
Otherwise not important, but, you know, he’s running for President, and it is very very stressful.
And wait until the foreign ops get to him.
So nice, I’d thought I’d write it twice…
You make Obama look bad, and you are genuinely hurting him , or your employer, when you speak in this manner.
Why do you think Bush had it so bad?
Do you know what blue flu is?
it’s like that.
Um, is this leading anywhere? … No, I guess not.
I’m beginning to think Obama has difficulty ascertaining reality, a difficult time assessing and determining the true factors and conditions he needs to negotiate, to win.
I’m getting a similar sense, but about someone else.
BTW, the buttons in Illinois legislature are YELLOW and really easy to see.
Green = Yes
Red = No
Yellow = Present
The buttons are big and easy to see and you have more than a few quick seconds to vote. You get at least 15-20 seconds, and others vote for Senators and Reps when they aren’t on the floor.
He didn’t press the wrong button. It is his way of weaseling out of controversial and highly liberal votes.
On another blog someone commented that - by trying to amend his votes with his intent - it shows Obama’s experience with signing statements!
Go Hillary!
He is definitely pressing all my wrong buttons.
Great diary Susan!
Is it wrong of me to laugh and take pleasure over this piece? Shuster seems awfully eager to make up for his “pimp” transgressions by waxing hyperbolic in his outrage. Whatever. It’s still funny!
However, look for this sort of stuff to continue into the GE if BO’s the nominee. They are defining him as a political lightweight verses McCain’s experience.
Lot more of this is coming our way.
Shuster and Scarborough’s discussion of this took place before Shuster’s “pimping” comment.
It was the morning of the LA Times story and obviously, Shuster, Scarborough and Brzezinski hadn’t read the article in the LA Times.
And, of course, not a word about it on Misogyny Network since.
I don’t give Shuster ANY credit for his comments, since he hasn’t seen fit to examine the article for the points about Rezko and the casino vote–a clear indication that he was in Rezko’s pocket.
The LA Times story is quite incredible. I read it and I sent it to lots of my friends. And in fact, several of them started to doubt Obama’s ability to make any decision since this button incident. Too bad it didn’t get much press.
We already surrered throught eight years with an airhead in the WHite House, we do not need the absent-minded professor.
It is not cute, it is scary.
Maybe he thought he was playing that game “Simon” - where you had to press the buttons when they light up and they get faster and faster?
If Hillary Clinton had just stood up after her AUMF vote and said, “Uh, I pressed the wrong button, and I’d like that recorded as a No vote,” she’d have a lot less to apologize for now.
Instead she took responsibility for her vote. That’s so much worse than lying about it.
Wait, wait, are you saying Hillary Clinton voted to authorize George W. Bush to use force in Iraq, by mistake, and she’s so noble and wonderful that rather than reveal that mistake, and go on record as opposing the AUMF, she “took responsibility” for her mistaken vote? With that kind of integrity, who needs corruption?
I had resisted watching the video until just now, but Jebus, folks, MSNBC dumps on Obama for, omigod, an apparent lapse in button-pushing skills, and you still say they’re unfairly boosting his candidacy?
Angelight @ 5:28PM wanted to know source of The Photo of Obama in Somali elders dress:
http://andrys1.blogspot.com/2008/02/source-of-obama-photo-from-kenya.html
A blogger did the digging and found that–whodathunkit?–Freepers downloaded the Obama photo first according to records. Then it went around among the Freepii (pl is…?) before going to Atlas Shrugged, WND, and viral.
By late Sunday afternoon, 2/24, Dave Johnson at Seeing the Forest had posted about The Photo appearing at rightwad sites; Drudge posted about it on early the next Monday morning. By suggesting it was from the Clinton campaign, Drudge achieved a major Rovian coup: A twofer of sliming the Clinton camp and getting the Obama-is-Muslim idea out there world wide.
http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2008/02/right_starting.htm
http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2008/02/todays_rightwin.htm
I hope this lays to rest the charge that the Clintons were behind finding and sending out The Photo (altho facts have little bearing on the beliefs of so many, even, now, in the reality-based community…alas).
I really don’t think the Clinton campaign prevailed upon Farrahkan to endorse Obama. Seriously doubt it.