IMHO Obama has TWO PROBLEMS which are SIGNIFICANT...

ONE, Obama's failure to fashion and clearly state a believable, easily understandable explanation of his relationship with and activites with Rezko. Until he does so, his Campaign will suffer a thousand cuts and the bleeding will continue.

TWO, Obama has failed to demonstrate he can 'fight back and defend himself' effectively against damaging allegations raised against him. Whether the allegations are true or not does not matter. It goes directly to the issue of electability if he is the Democratic Nominee. He will be attacked, mercilessly by the Repub Nominee and accompanying MSM and sound machine. Guaranteed. So far his attempt to communicate in heavily 'nuanced' ways will not instill confidence in his abililty to fight back and defend himself, and makes him look unsure of himself and possibly weak.

Obama now has before him the opportunity to deal with both problems.

IF Obama continues down the same path travelled so far, he will surely experience more of the same criticism he has absorbed so far.

The ball really is in Obama's court ....

The repugs are going to eat him up alive.
He should be viewing this as his dress rehearsal.

That's why the republicans hate them, they've never been able to beat them.

Obama gets through the primary gauntlet, and he's ready for anything the GOP can throw at him.

have you seen Biden's comment? He said the same thing, only in his own style lol.

(I can't remember where I read it though :-( )

in South Carolina, both are losing ground while Edwards is picking up some steam.

Obama has to learn how to defend himself effectively and counterpunch. Hillary's swipes at him are nothing compared to what he will face with the Repubs if he is the nominee.

You know, I gave the Clintons the benefit of the doubt on the whole Whitewater thing, because they were not accused of any wrongdoing.

The same way I'm giving Obama the benefit of the doubt on Rezko, because he's - wait for it - not accused of any wrongdoing.

Should I be suspicious of the Clintons now?

I suppose I could've believed the Clintons were doing shady stuff with Whitewater, based on the fact that the MSM hyped it 24/7 for a few years.

I suppose I could've believed Obama was doing shady stuff with Rezko, based on the fact that the MSM is hyping it now.

But I prefer evidence.

He really doesn't seem to know what it's going to be like if he's the nominee.

:eyes:

It doesn't bother you that he seems to cave into corporations or that he wants to make kissy-face with Repigs. You want to go after him on some bullshit guilt-by-association claim?


Oh right. You're a Hillary supporter.

Allow me to just say, once again... :eyes:

people are going to rake up whatever they can in desperation but Obama is unsinkable and is holding up very well. He's being Swiftboated left right and center!

Obama is soft and untested.A typical democratic nominee in the form of Dukakis and Kerry

If Obama is the nominee,suicide watch will commence next November when the Dems lose another election

Hillary is the clear choice

1. Rezko's a joke. A slur. A clear, silly attempt at "swiftboating."

2. Every argument I've heard directed at Obama gets shot down quickly and efficiently. You slur him with Rezko, and then say he doesn't fight back?

Funny shit.

Repubs know the score.
Repubs know they have to hit a home run to win this one.
Repubs will use everything in their arsenal to bring down the Democratic Nominee.

THis truly is nothing so far.

ANd it is not the truthful allegations that the Democratic Nominee should fear the most. It will be the constantly moving hit and run attacks on him/her that the MSM will pick up and run with which will be most difficult to overcome.

Obama is not a child who needs to be schooled in the ways of the world. How about the Clintons spend some time making things rough on Edwards. They could make him into a better campaigner and candidate.

The Clintons are very effective campaigners whose tactics border on (or cross the boundary into) dirty politics. That's the way they are. It is both their blessing and their curse.

Their campaign against Obama is designed to accomplish Hillary's nomination. Nothing else. No one should pretend that it is a learning opportunity for Obama. He is a smart man who has been elected to the Senate. He knows how the "real world" works. Save the "tough love" for your kids.

that Hillary supporters and the Clinton campaign are not liking just how resilient and tough Obama is becoming, and that her "easy" path to the WH is becoming more treacherous by the day.




Edited for leaving the c out in becoming

I have had it with Obama attacks, but obviously they will be coming for the next 10 years. By all means, state your case.

The Obama supporters need to understand that history is chocked full of instances in which the 'smartest' candidate lost to the candidate of 'lesser intelligence.' (No Bush comparison needed).

It is about addressing what the voting public deems important, since they will do the voting.

It is about creating the appearance that the candidate is capable of defending himself from attacks by his opponents.

Your analogy to childrearing techniques is inappropriate and not applicable to the statements I made.

Any experienced political strategist will confirm what I posted here.

Prove that he can handle the attacks and fight back.

While I agree that campaigning ability is one factor (among many) that we should look for in our candidates, to excuse dirty campaigning as some type of public service provided to the other person so that he can prove how tough he is, lets the perpetrator off the hook. If I abused my son (no danger of that now, he's bigger than me) to toughen him up for the "real world", while my tactic may be effective in producing a tough young man, there would be no excuse for my behavior.

The Clintons are tough campaigners. I am sure that does not surprise Obama nor anyone else on the national political scene. They do not campaign to make Obama a better candidate or prove how tough he is. They campaign the way they do, because they have the goal of getting Hillary nominated. Nothing more; nothing less.

Everyone around me knows I'm a wonk, and so I get a lot of people stopping by my desk to discuss politics casually. Every single one of them has been very curious about the rezco 'issue'.

Like someone else said, it's perception...

"his attempt to communicate in heavily 'nuanced' ways"

You nailed it. I don't think his style of communication is going to change and begin to clear anything up for us. This is how he manages to let people project their hopes and good will onto his intentions.

Obama has been fighting back and has resources and surrogates fighting back. Once he's the nominee and doesn't have another candidate lying about his record, his message can be more focused.

As for Rezko, despite all the crap you might read from Hillaryworld, Patrick Fitzgerald has already said that Obama hasn't done anything wrong.

getting what we need? We need someone that will fight to end corporate control of our government. Plan and simple. If we don't all other issues are moot. The Clinton dynasty so far has failed to convince me.

Sorry, but theres no 'there' there.

Platitudes are nice if all that you are looking for is a candidate that can give great speeches. Hell, given a script, Phred Thompson can deliver a great speech.

Let me have substance over style for $1,000, Alex...

Seriously. I brought it up to a couple politically active friends and their reaction was a quizzical look.

This story has little traction beyond a few political junkies and overly zealous partisans with more time on their hands than sense.

I'm curious... I wonder about what's not being reported...
Which candidate is the real deal? THAT'S the bottom line for me!
I think we all have a right to know the truth beyond the "perception"

I wonder why, corporate media loves Obama... Why they seem to hate Hillary
Yet,the biggest(Fox News,News Corp.) Ruport Murdoch, supports her...!

I wonder why, the media won't cut the crap, and do some real reporting...
What they would find would be truely 'myth shattering'!

--Obama brings up the IWR-
When he did, have, a chance to vote NO to WAR with the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment,
Obama and another candidate (McCain) played it politically safe--
and didn't show up!
I'm worried Obama will be another pushover for the Republican party, drug and insurance companies.
I found he may not be the way he portrays himself... (It's Perception)..

"The apparent contradiction between Sen Obama's political calculation to join the Wal-Mart-bashing lobby, and his wife's profitable role with a company that makes money from Wal-Mart"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/05/13/wobama13.xml

-- "This story is a big eye opener about Obama's philosophical commitment to universal healthcare.
His wife is earning $300,000 from a hospital administration job that essentially amounts to PR work--
--"Chicago University Hospital Regularly turns away patients with no health insurance and made numerous patient dumping settlements.
She provides a happy friendly famous face for denial of care and showing the indigent the door."

---"Another story in the Tribune highlights that her signature innovation as "Community Outreach" director/VP was to get unpaid volunteers to go through the Emergency ward to "refer" unisured and non emergency patients to other clinics.
Her role at the UCH seems to be a polite way to have folks removed from the waiting rooms.
It's kind of myth shattering to see she did this sort of work..."
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_opinion_letters/2006/10/hospital_positi.html

All the GOP had to do was step back and watch the bickering..
Their debate tonight was very effective,I know!
We already may have lost. It's sad..


" Martin Luther King III to John Edwards: I challenge all candidates to follow your lead"
'…I appreciate that on the major issues of health care, the environment, and the economy, you have framed the issues for what they are - a struggle for justice. And, you have almost single-handedly made poverty an issue in this election."

How in the world do you spin this one? Another "we just did not have an inkling..." is NOT going to get it.

The Obama folks have still not come up with a full disclosure and consistent strategy for handling this mess --which is going to continue dragging Obama down like a millstone around his neck.

Now it is a question of 'competence' as well.

Hello????