DailyKOS, Atrios founders, MyDD slam Obama's desperate attacks

Markos:

I am really starting to see Obama as someone who will rush to embrace every right-wing talking point against every Democratic constituencies.

In one of his standard riffs, Obama asserts that his career choices -- community organizer, civil rights lawyer, elected official -- underscores his commitment to public service and to bringing about political and social change. He always mentions the lucrative job offers he turned down, but today he added a new line.

"That's why I didn't become a trial lawyer," Obama told the Newton audience -- a clear dig at Edwards, who made millions in the courtroom.

Apparently, trial lawyers can't have a commitment to public service and bringing about political and social change...

Is Markos not sexy or what?
http://kos.dailykos.com


Atrios:
"Is there a right wing talking point Obama hasn't rushed to embrace?"
http://atrios.blogspot.com/2007_12_30_archive.html#4527640556289780194

MyDD's Todd Beeton asks: "Is it desperation?"
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/12/31/133333/87


THE NET ROOTS ARE SPEAKING!

not sexy.

he tossed aside Edwards after he decided to take public financing.

Dodd's a good choice, he's my 3rd fav. :-)

:-(

i don't see it as bashing trial lawyers as a career. He's saying he chose to go into public service right from the start instead of doing something else that would make him more money.

I mean, he was a civil rights attorney, not a tort lawyer. He was in law, but chose to go in a different, less lucrative field.

We never learn do we.

We never learn do we.

Well I hear there are Hillary sites, haven't gone there.

I think they would have been Gore given a chance. Alas.

Obama supporters are often seen as shallow.

I am an Obama supporter.

a lawyer who specializes in defending clients before a court of law. It can be a defense attorney. It isn't just what Edwards does and I don't think it was some slur.

His work as a civil rights attorney wasn't trials, he didn't go to court, not too glamorous. He worked where he could get done what was important to him.
Obama got start in civil rights practice

Does he brag about continuing to do summer work for them when he got into Congress for no pay? I would but haven't heard him talk about it.

I don't think it's wrong for him to stress his commitment to service over glory and riches. It isn't a slam to others, he made the choice before he knew Edwards. Should he not talk about it because he might sound rude? It doesn't mean Edwards doesn't care.

jump to such extreme conclusions as "vicious attack" without hearing the entirety of his comments and getting it in context but other than that I think it's a bad idea.

His/Her avatar idol would be proud.

Or is he just too busy attacking progressives, like Krugman and Edwards?

Trial lawyers are the way little people can strike back against rich and powerful corporations.

if he thinks it means a job or more power for him. He's about as useless as a bull with impotence.

He's even said as much in interviews. He's a James Carville in the making, and yet another part of the problem.

I've spent enough time around campaigns and elected officials to know the kind: the political groupie. They get off on either having power or being around it. They're more interested in people noticing them for what they do than for what they actually do. Unfortunately, politics attracts an inordinate amount of these types.

In Hollywood, they call them "Starfuckers". I'm not sure what they call them in politics.

Moreover, Obama's tired right-wing talking point was tried in Iowa in 2006 against Democratic Rep. Bruce Braley and IT BACKFIRED. Here's an interesting excerpts from the post-campaign study of that election fight:

During his recent campaign for the U.S. House of Representatives in Iowa's First Congressional District, AAJ member Bruce Braley frequently found himself vilified as a "trial lawyer's trial lawyer" by the National Republican Congressional Committee and the corporate special-interest groups that spent heavily on advertising against him.

Today, however, they have to refer to Braley, the former president of the Iowa Trial Lawyers Association, by a completely different title: congressman.

Proponents of civil justice restrictions in Iowa and across the nation thought they had a magic formula to help them defeat Braley and other supporters of the civil justice system last November: Just shout "trial lawyer" from the rooftops, blame attorneys for everything from high medical costs to economic angst, and watch the votes come rolling in.

But they were in for a surprise. The voters of eastern Iowa elected Braley over Republican Jack Whalen by a 12-point margin, making him the first Democrat to hold the seat in 30 years....

Postelection polling

...

The poll showed that 84 percent of voters in Iowa's First Congressional District knew about Braley's work as a trial lawyer--a high level of recognition. Of those who said they knew the most about his profession, Braley received the support of 56 percent to Whalen's 42 percent. These respondents "were more likely than other voters to say they felt strongly that he was the best choice in the race," Garin reported.

The reason these voters were so thoroughly schooled in Braley's background undoubtedly was that Whalen spent significant resources and countless hours telling them about it. On broadcast television alone, Whalen and his supporters spent close to $700,000 on ads with titles like "Greedy Trial Lawyer" and "Can Sue, Can Do" to attack Braley's status as a trial lawyer... The poll showed that the majority of voters supported Braley over his opponent on issues that usually form the basis for attacks against trial attorneys and pro-justice candidates, such as the false allegation that soaring health care costs are attributable to "frivolous" lawsuits. ... In the 2006 elections, in the country's top 100 media markets, proponents of civil justice restrictions--the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Medical Association, and others--spent almost $11 million to attack trial lawyers running for office and other candidates who support justice. But proponents of justice overwhelmingly prevailed on Election Day.

While there were other issues at the top of voters' minds in 2006, 14 of the 18 trial lawyers who ran won, while 248 of the 306 pro-justice candidates supported by AAJ prevailed. The other side tried to convince candidates that they would lose if they supported the right of every person to hold a wrongdoer accountable. But our efforts and the success of pro-civil-justice candidates helped debunk that myth....

Not only is Obama using a right-wing talking point, but he's using a right-wing talking point that has been proven INEFFECTIVE IN IOWA!

Someone has to represent the people against the corporations/insurance companies...and I would rather have someone that represents the people than someone who chose to strictly be a government hack. Public service my ass--THAT is overrated.

because he doesn't want to be seen as a POPULIST ...... but a better Clinton than the Clintons for Centrists.

I think he started off better before the Dem "HANDLERS" got to him and confused his message.

But, he was always supposed to be the Vice President...not the President...and that's okay, too.

and who of us wouldn't have succumbed to that? :shrug: To have one's ego stroked and be compared to the Kennedys is very "heady stuff." What folks forget is that Obama doesn't have the "Kennedy Machine" in his family structure behind him. But, he does have some good ILlinois folks who are backing him...still..it isn't the Kennedy Machine from Boston... Different Time...different ERA...different Family Structure. :shrug:

he'd be sworn in at 47. Bill Clinton was 46, JFK was 43.
Edwards would be 55.

Now if it was 35 years ago there is a big difference in maturity between a 12 year old and a 20 year old. 47 and 55, not so much.

Yes, Markos admits going to work for the CIA immediately before launching his funding-is-a-little-mysterious website. And yes, the CIA is pulling for the Clintons.

and your act is already getting old. People criticize Obama for attacking and for lacking substance. I scanned through your posts on this thread and have seen you dismissive of Obama in the snidest way, no real substance at all, and no positive message.

Now I don't mean to be strident, it is just an observation of mine that people listen to reason, and that you could serve your candidate better.