Obama's New Kind of Politics Closely Resembles the Old (It's the hypocrisy, stupid!)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

==By JEFF ZELENY
Published: June 16, 2007

WASHINGTON, June 15 — Senator Barack Obama often offers a crisp sales pitch to voters, imploring them to be part of something new, different and hopeful. “If you want a new kind of politics,” he says, “it’s time to turn the page.”==

==The latest episode unfolded Thursday. As Mr. Obama spent a rare day in the Capitol, researchers at his headquarters in Chicago distributed a document that directly — and sharply — took aim at Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.==

==For the Clinton campaign, drawing attention to a document attacking its own candidate had the effect of demonstrating that Mr. Obama, like other candidates, is not above a bit of political street fighting and, by implication, should not be allowed to cast himself as a champion of a purer version of public service. But in this case, the disclosure also threatened to create a substantive problem for Mr. Obama by leading an Indian-American group to accuse Mr. Obama of engaging in racial stereotyping.==

==Mr. Obama declined an interview request.==

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/16/us/politics/16obama.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin

[illinoisprogressive]

1. why the sudden craving to act like a hillarybot and posting nothing but, anti obama posts.

[Ethelk2044]

2. An old repeat of the last couple of days Getting Old

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

3. Because we're sick of this rock star nonsense

We want more than smiles and platitudes. But I'm not a Hillary Clinton fan either. Both are corporatists, though they may have good intentions.

[jefferson_dem]

5. You mean this rock star?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKsoXHYICqU

:bounce: A bit of :sarcasm: there.

Seriously, don't be so offended that a Dem candidate may actually inspire...

[Tellurian]

11. Do you know any politicians who aren't corporatists?

I don't... Campaign Finance Reform is so far down the ladder as a priority that needs fixing, talking about as if it's a negative attribute of a candidate only blurs the important stuff like Restoration of the Constitution, The Iraq War, HealthCare... and comparing their platforms seeing what they offer and who giving us what we need...at least, thats how I look at it! I don't dwell on things I can't change, I dwell on the things I can change..

[jefferson_dem]

4. Because that's all they have. I mean, imagine being saddled with *that* image to promote ...

Major icky...

[Scriptor Ignotus]

6. His campaign isn't going to be perfect

and neither will he. I think this attack was poorly conceived and poorly executed but it's certainly not going to make me lose my support for Obama.

FYI - between Clinton and Obama only one candidate accepts money from PACs and Lobbysists. (hint: It's Clinton).

[Captain_Nemo]

9. But, he betrayed the core of his own political philosophy in order to get an edge. Is this good?

And, if you say yes then he is not the hero you are hoping for. He is the same as the rest. Even Colin with his Jaguar from Bandar.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

15. Exactly. I am not surprised that Obama supporters have not answered your simple question nt

[Scriptor Ignotus]

18. did he?

or was it a campaign aide in some office somewhere? we'll probably never know the answer to that, but I find it improbable that Obama or any other candidate would review or sign off on these types of "dirty tricks" attacks. This wasn't a paid for television spot, it was a sneak attack. Plausible deniablity would seem the appropriate course for any candidate, so again, I really doubt Obama was cognizant of this smear.

Also, I do not think Obama is the second coming. He's a flawed human being and his campaign is going to do things I disagree with. Hell, Obama is going to say and DO things I disagree with. But he can be my "hero" at the same time.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

21. If any candidate would review this it would have been Obama

Why? Because this was not a routine attack on an opponent. This was something that risks doing serious damage to the Obama brand, which is based largely on him posing as above such things. No rogue low-level staffer could have put the brand at risk without getting clearance from Obama, Axlerod, and the other principals. This was a calculated risk to help a candidate who has not gained much traction in the polls since he joined the race (let's not forget that he had about 20% support in the polls before he said anything about what he intended to do...).

[Scriptor Ignotus]

24. we'll never know for sure

but over the past few years I recall several "scandals" involving an aide's poor judgement. (typically a Republican's aide...) That line is probably BS half the time and true the other half. It appears the Clinton team spun this back against Obama very skillfully. Kind of scary how well they did it...

Hillary was supposed to be the clear frontrunner and Obama is hanging tough with her in several states and leading her in a few, depending on the polls. I'm not sure how that could be called "no traction".

In any event, this whole episode appears to be a huge mistake for his campaign. On that I think we agree.

[LBJDemocrat]

7. Every four years

a candidate promises to "unite the country". Obama's idiotic remarks about the "smallness of politics" (whatever the f--k that means) was more of the same. I never expected him to run a clean campaign.

Frankly, I'm getting sick of these mysterious "memos" that both Clinton and Obama put out (especially Obama). For example, there was the one from Obama's campaign that criticized Clinton for being in the pocket of India's top corporations. Of course, because these aren't officially endorsed by Obama himself, he can claim he had nothing to do with the memo afterward. He doesn't have the guts to openly attack Clinton, so he sends his attack dogs and then lets them take the fall when it doesn't work. Incredibly sleazy.

Clinton's been known to do the same.

Frankly, I'm sick of these clowns.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

16. It is as if he plagirized straight out of the Rove playbook

A) "I will change the tone in Washington."
B) "The ways of Washington must change."
C) "After all of the shouting and all of the scandal, after all the bitterness and broken faith, we can begin again. The wait has been long, but it won't be long now. A prosperous nation is ready to renew its purpose and unite behind great goals, and it won't be long now."
D) " It's what allows us to pursue our individual dreams, yet still come together as a single American family: "E pluribus unum," out of many, one. Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us, the spin masters and negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything goes. "

Who said which? Bush or Obama?

[Captain_Nemo]

8. This is what is disturbing to me about Barack. The positive rhetoric and now this action.

He is the same as the rest. And these supporters seem to give him a pass at anything he does - even unethical things that betray his philosophy.
They should be asking themselves: "Maybe I should look closer at this candidate and what he could possibly bring (good and bad) to our country."
That would be an informed voter.
But, all I hear is hero worship. Reminds me of Nader voters.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

17. Good post

You took the words right out of my mouth. :toast:

[Scriptor Ignotus]

19. good point

I know nothing about the man except he has a big smile and nice posture. He has my vote.

Please. Give us Obama supporters some modicum of respect for our intelligence and political knowledge.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

22. The fact is that he was at about 20% in the polls before he said a word about what he would do

He has many real supporters but most of his support is based on his image, not his platform. After all, how could he have roughly 20% support based on substance when we had no platform at the time?

[Hippo_Tron]

10. Don't really care, I'm not voting for him because of his "new kind of politics"

[Captain_Nemo]

13. I respect that. But I have to know: What is it about him that makes you think he can

solve (and help solve) the top three problems threatening our planet and country:
Global Warming
Iraq/Iran (we don't know what Dick/Bush will get us into in the near future)
shrinking middle class/education

In my opinion she has the stuff. And, in my opinion there are no second chances at these problems. This is kind of "it."
The next president must be successful. I don't have that trust/faith in him. He is too young/new.....and, evedently he doesn't have his ducks in a row even in the campaign. The cracks are showing.

[Hippo_Tron]

14. His record thus far suggests to me that he's more willing to challenge conventional ideas

To be perfectly honest, he's only my first choice out of the candidates running. If you asked me who I really wanted to be President it would be between Wes Clark, Russ Feingold, or maybe Ted Kennedy.

For one, Obama did not support the Iraq War before we went in and Clinton did. This suggests to me that Obama can stand up to conventional wisdom and that's a huge factor that I'm looking for.

Obama has been far more of an advocate for earmark reform. Not mentioned in these articles, Obama took the initiative with the Coburn/Obama Bill.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2007/06/4639_clinton_loads_u.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/31/AR2006123101004_pf.html

Also as mentioned in the article above, Obama voted against TV Marti and that is a big deal to me. The Untied States Policy toward Cuba is absurd in a post cold war world. There is absolutely no reason that we should continue the trade embargo yet both parties continue to support it. Clinton has said definitively that she will continue the status quo. Obama's vote against TV Marti suggests to me that he's willing to consider reform.

I think that both Clinton and Obama are both intelligent, both have great political skills, and both are capable of running the country. Neither would be in the position that they are in today if it were not for these qualities.

Obama is, in my view, more willing to embrace new ideas.

As I said above, I don't care about political mudslinging and I don't think it is even close to the worst problem in our campaigns. This most recent story will probably not be noticed at all by most of the voters because it is so early.

[zulchzulu]

12. Debunk the memo, Senator Clinton

Once I see where the memo was not accurate, I'll face whatever happens.

However, the memo has facts and a paper trail proving points made. Clinton even said that she could be elected in Punjab.

The Clinton campaign hired a rat inside the Obama campaign that gave the memo to her campaign. Instead of debunking the evidence, her campaign decided to use the "racist" canard to deflect from the truth. They want to play dirty...guess what...there is enough dirt to sink her campaign in a week if need be.

There is good reason for them to be scared...they know why... they had better know that Obama is not going to sit idle and watch her henchmen play dirty. Count on it.

[Forkboy]

20. The most vocal complainers of Obama are the ones who engage in the old style themselves.

[tammywammy]

23. Indeed, so I've noticed

[draft_mario_cuomo]

25. The complaints relate to hypocrisy, not him making an attack on an opponent nt

[Forkboy]

26. I hope you'll forgive me if I see the outrage about Obama's hypocrisy to be slightly selective.

Hillary supporters whine about attacks on her but do everything they can to attack Obama.Obama supporters whine about attacks on him but do everything they can to attack Hillary.

Let's just say I'm highly skeptical about the motivations of either campaigns when it comes to anything about honor,integrity and decency,because they and their hardcore supporters show very little of any of that.

I'm not saying everyone fits into that description,and you may be one of the exceptions.But campaigns tend to bring out a lot of phony outrage,usually on the average of one item per week.And I suspect that many of the people "upset" over this would gladly defend it had it been their candidate of choice instead of one they don't like.

[NYCGirl]

27. And the OP, I believe, is an Edwards supporter. NT

[Forkboy]

28. I know,which is why I said he may be an exception.

[election_2004]

30. Word

And it's the Hillaristas who'll defend everything she does (regardless of whether it's good or bad policy), once the MSM whores thrust her into the White House.

[election_2004]

29. Really....?

Wow, I hadn't noticed. :sarcasm:

Of course, they'll just brush off that accusation, because they "trust themselves for trusting in Sen. Clinton." ;)