Obama's Flaws Multiply

Democrats have been worrying about defending Mr. Obama's highly liberal voting record in a general election. Now they need to fret that he makes too many mistakes, from ignoring the Rev. Wright time bomb until the videotapes blew up in front of him, to his careless condescension towards salt-of-the-earth Democrats. Mr. Obama has a tendency to make such cultural miscues. Speaking to small-town voters in Iowa last year, he asked, "Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?"

For all his winning ways and natural appeal to the camera, Mr. Obama hasn't really been tested in a major campaign. In 2000, then-state Sen. Obama challenged Congressman Bobby Rush, who was vulnerable after having been crushed in a bid to become mayor of Chicago. Mr. Rush, a former Black Panther, painted Mr. Obama as "inauthentic" and beat him 2-1

Mr. Obama has prospered in Democratic primaries. But as John Harris and Jim VandeHei note in Politico.com, that's in part because these primaries have "been an exercise in self-censorship" about Mr. Obama's weaknesses. It is "indisputably true," they write, that "Obama is on the brink of the Democratic nomination without having had to confront head-on the evidence about his general election challenges." But Mr. Obama has shown weakness with key Democratic constituencies. He's had to fend off concerns about his Middle East policies with Jewish voters; he's also won only a third of Hispanic primary voters.

But isn't it Barack Obama who has been spending months stirring up "anti-trade sentiment?" He has threatened to yank the U.S. out of the North American Free Trade Agreement unless Canada and Mexico renegotiate it. Last week, he denounced the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. According to Canadian diplomats, top Obama economic adviser Austan Goolsbee admitted to them that they could dismiss his man's anti-Nafta rhetoric. All of this makes Democrats wonder if Mr. Obama is ready for prime time.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120821921853714665.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries

is just one of the way they will undermine, attack and destroy his candidacy. Or try to.

Out-of-touch, unAmerican, unpatriotic, weak on safety and defence, surrounded by extremists zealots angry "black" people. That is where the GOP will focus its full energy. We will hear about keeping america safe, and enemies and enemies within, and all manner of garbage and tripe. We haven't heard too much (yet) about his "asociations" with Farrakhan, his "anti-semitism", his consorting with "terrorists". But we will. Obama will be turned into a "foreigner" in front of our eyes.

Get ready to work damn hard to fend off another republican presidency.

you're like an oasis in a desert of carnivorous bipeds.

Sure, they'll throw all kinds of bullshit at Obama, and he'll talk about every bit of it, just as we should have been talking about these things in this country for the past 30 years. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, is one of them - a corporate player who they love to throw mud at, but who they would much rather have in place as a keeper of the Old Politics.

Bring it on, I say, the talk about elitism, Farrahkan, Wright - every one of these issues is a perfect opportunity for dialog in which Obama will gladly and masterfully engage. If people hear such a dialog and still vote for McCain, then we truly deserve the result. But we ought at least to have the chance for a real choice.

You may be wrong.
(Obama is of course a supreme corporate player so don't get carried away there.)
And NONE of us deserve four years of McCain. Not even the average GOP voter.

Meanwhile:

Uppity women
Uppity blacks
Uppity people
Uppity and unite against the GOP

Anyone else would've been out of the race by now, now Queen Hillary!

Oh, no! Not Miss All-the-Votes-Must-be-Counted-but-I'll-Break-My-Pledge.

She's a She-Devil!

That's the second or third time I've seen her called that (incredibly stupid) name. What the fuck is it?

"She's a she-devil, I tells ya! Run for your lives!!"

Why don't you just go ahead and call her a c**t? That's what you're dying to do, isn't it?

Bake

She says Obama is unelectable.

She is getting beat by Obama.

So she says we should support her
because she is the stronger candidate.



Young Hillary in PA.

which will facilitate another WIN for them..

They sit with baited breath waiting and hoping..

BTW Super Delegates

72 for Obama
-1 for Hillary

since early march .... hmmm nice trend don't you think?

.

Is that, like, fishy smelling? :rofl:

.... A paper with an Editorial/Opinion department that isn't at all right-wing and Neocon-biased.

:eyes:

:rofl:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

you could at least be honest about it.

OPINION
Obama's Flaws Multiply
By JOHN FUND
April 15, 2008; Page A19

If so, here's your chance to defend rather than attack the messenger and the OP..

Be my guest!

First and foremost, for you to post unattributed text, even with a link, is an exercise in falseness.
You should provide title and source and author, which you didn't.

When people post right wing sources to slam other candidates, I doubt their progressive credentials, so yes, I am criticizing you as the messenger, and you deserve to be criticized. Your failure to attribute your source is deception, of course.

The basic falsehood is the title of the piece. These are old criticisms already answered. Obama's flaws do not multiply, this author is merely piling old news items together.

what would you expect from the WSJ

An 'analysis' by John Fund no less.

The merger of old Hill with the radical right proceeds.

Murdoch, Scaife, John Fund ... what's next?

Barack Obama: Democrats deserve a nominee for change
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
On Tuesday, Pennsylvanians will have the unusual luxury of voting in a Democratic presidential primary that promises to be truly relevant. Like two opposing armies marching to a new Gettysburg, the forces of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton come to this latest battlefield symbolizing two views of America -- one of the past, one of the future. Pennsylvania Democrats need to rise to the historic moment. For us it is the candidates' vision and character that loom as the decisive factors in this race. •

This editorial began by observing that one candidate is of the past and one of the future. The litany of criticisms heaped on Sen. Obama by the Clinton camp, simultaneously doing the work of the Republicans, is as illustrative as anything of which one is which. These are the cynical responses of the old politics to the new.

Sen. Obama has captured much of the nation's imagination for a reason. He offers real change, a vision of an America that can move past not only racial tensions but also the political partisanship that has so bedeviled it.

•
To be sure, Sen. Clinton carries the aspirations of women in particular, but even in this she is something of a throwback, a woman whose identity and public position are indelibly linked to her husband, her own considerable talents notwithstanding. It does not help that the Clinton brand is seen by many in the country as suspect and shifty, bearing the grimy stamp of political calculation counting as much as principle.

Pennsylvania -- this encrusted, change-averse commonwealth where a state liquor monopoly holds on against all reason and where municipal fiefdoms shrink from sensible consolidation -- needs to take a strong look at the new face and the new hope in this race. Because political business-as-usual is more likely to bring the usual disappointment for the Democrats this fall, the Post-Gazette endorses the nomination of Barack Obama, who has brought an excitement and an electricity to American politics not seen since the days of John F. Kennedy.

First published on April 16, 2008 at 12:00 am
EmailPrint

than Bush spent looking for Osama Bin Laden. I've never seen such organized nonsense.

before the "bitter" gaffe... I saw them as equally viable winners.

At this point I think the party has a REAL problem if Mr. Obama is the nominee.

Still praying for a Clinton/Obama ticket. Cuz I really do believe that Bill could help Barack... by spinning "bittergate" to his benefit in the south. To be honest... I don't know another Democrat who can schmooze them. Maybe Edwards? As VP? But I think that's a longshot.

If there is anything untrue or misrepsented in the OP please state what it is and debunk it..

to loathe the candidate clinton (same as George and Dick and Bill) and support Obama. Right back at ya dude, btw I always follow the WSJ...they are a bastion for us Dem's!

:rofl:

:wtf:

The WSJ has a very large circulation. It might be a good idea to prepare a defense for your candidate, if in fact you are sure he is the presumptive nominee..That is Battle Strategy 101.. just in case the Republicans are at home twiddling their thumbs..

It's not a factual reporting of the news. So I will ask once again, when did DU start looking to the Wall Street Journal for guidance?

Here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5513090

1. Admit you are a Republican operative. No die hard Democrat could post so many conservative oped pieces in a Democratic website as you had.
2. Join Free Republic. I'm sure your posts will be welcome there.
3. Wake up and smell the coffee. "Your girl" is losing, big time in the words of Obama's cousin Dick Cheney. Just admit it please!

Every Wall Street Journal contains some argument for them.

This provides a good summing up of how the GOP see Obama's vulnerabilities in the GE. It's not totally a hit piece. In fact from a dem standpoint it lists a set of reasons why Obama is a strong candidate from the perspective of his stances on issues.(That is not Fund's point of course.)

It also contains a nasty slice at Hillary which should thrill some Obama supporters to the core.

But the truth is that when they call Obama a "rookie" when it comes to the scalding of a general election - they are right on target.

Like him, love him or loathe him - he will be as a see creature without its protective shell in the fall should he be the nominee.

Look ahead to working damn hard folks.

Obama supporters should be working overtime preparing, getting their candidate in shape. The crowd participating on this thread have been a pleasure to talk to. Absent the usual distractions of the Clinton ravings from the maniacal zealots obsessed with them at least give normal people a chance to think.

...of those who think that because they love Obama everyone else will too.
First they can't accept that democrats of good will reach other conclusions. Then the simple mindedness of believing in his easy ascendancy.

Crikey - McCain is a vulnerable candidate too. And Bush deeply unpopular. But all the stops will be pulled to prevent a democrat reaching the WH. And those who think the Obamas are not in for being excoriated and "exposed" are in for a big shock.

They rant at Hillary. She is doing him a BIG favor right now. Obama has incredible vulnerabilities in the GE.

i thought the guys came by yesterday and picked it up...oh well another day of fund`s garbage at democratic underground

Thanks for posting.

:kick:

:wtf:

"The left is the best, get here and we'll do the rest"
-Not quite Jim Morrison.

Mighta been about then.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

won't drag out of the sewer?

His rowboat is slipping under the water one pebble at a time.

n/t

Obama thanks you for all the help you've given him here on DU. :thumbsup:

I think your political compass needs some maintainance work

When is Hillary 44 going to go offline? Before she drops out or a month or so later?

You clinton supporters really ARE bad at math.

each other's candidate, we'll have nothing to look forward to except a John McCain presidency . . . in this forum in particular it's gone W-A-A-A-Y beyond politics to a level of personal destruction that rivals the worst of the Republican swift-boating tactics . . . how anyone expects the eventual nominee to survive this pissing contest and win the general election is beyond me . . .

Wrong, but persistent.

:sarcasm: