WTF? How could Obama have made such a blooper?

[cali]

This a big mistake on his part. Novakula dangles the bait, and Obama snapped it up. Clinton denies it, and the whole thing is expanded into a bigger deal- and he looks like a rookie. Who the hell is advising him on this kind of thing? I could have told him what to do: Put out a dignified statement slamming Novak and repuke tactics designed to divide the dems. Instead, he takes the opportunity to accuse Clinton of swiftboating. Can you spell boomerang?

[Dawgs]

1. You're kidding right?

Obama looks like he's not going to hide from whisper/smear attacks.

What would you want him to do, ignore it? That's the kind of thing that got Kerry in trouble in 04'.

Or, maybe you never liked Obama or perhaps support someone else.

[cali]

4. Of course I'm not kidding.

I like Obama. I support Kucinich- although I know he won't win. But this was a fucking rookie error. He didn't have to hide, but he went charging after Clinton on the "evidence" of a blind item from ROBERT NOVAK, well known sleazeball and repuke political operative.

[SpiralHawk]

18. Novack is a bona fide republicon homelander propagandist

A real snake in the grass, lacking in honor and unworthy of trust.

[MethuenProgressive]

88. And Obama took the bait, hook, line, and sinker. And blamed Clinton for that, too!

His conniption fit over being totally played by Novak was an embarrassment to all his supporters.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. Yeah...

He should have slapped Novak...

He attacked the wrong target... If Obama was president during WW ll and the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor he would have attacked Norway...

[PurityOfEssence]

81. Norway was occupied by the Germans at that point; that would've been a good way to help the Soviets

The Murmansk convoys were crucial to keeping the Russians supplied, and that would have been a rather interesting and effective approach. If we had just contained the Japanese but concentrated much more on stomping the Nazis, we could have very possibly kept Eastern Europe from coming under Soviet domination. Concentrating on the Nazis would have also saved many Jews. There are all sorts of benefits from this approach, and Quisling's government was allied with our enemies at this point and rather important in their war effort.

Cute little rejoinder, but it sort of falls apart...

Are we so sure that Clinton's campaign hasn't been doing this? It certainly sounds plausible.

It'll take a bit of time to see if anyone comes forward to claim having been played

[aquart]

7. Where the hell is my popcorn?

"Or, maybe you never liked Obama or perhaps support someone else."

LOL!

[Honeycombe8]

83. I'm on my way to the store. I'll pick you up some. Redenbocker "movie style"? nt

[AtomicKitten]

of course you are right

Obama is smart to nip this in the bud, otherwise, the cheesy insinuation will be exploited ad nauseam.

[ruggerson]

13. If he felt the need to address it, he should have addressed Novak

not Hillary. Any half witted strategist could have told him that.

By swiping at Hillary, he's giving CREDENCE to Novak's story and to rightwing smears in general.

Dumb move.

[AtomicKitten]

14. I disagree.

This is a replay of the whisper campaign against Kerry in 2004.

[sufrommich]

20. If he has proof it's from the Clinton

campaign. Now would be the time to put it out there.

[ruggerson]

23. It's from ROBERT NOVAK

A man who works in concert with the RNC! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what they're doing - this is their modus operandi.

[Tellurian]

59. Yup, Obama keeps crying Wolf..

and you know how that all ends!

Sure nipping it in the bud is great but make sure your nipping the right BUD, Bud!

Otherwise, you end up looking like a neophyte who thinks he's running a foot race in Central Park.

[MethuenProgressive]

73. Obama screws up - again. His inexperience is now his most notable attribute,

The '04 Obama looked promising.

[Jim Sagle]

2. Yes, the empty suit fucked up. Score one for the empty pantsuit.

[noamnety]

5. As much as I'm not a hillary fan

I'm finding your repeated use of the phrase "empty pantsuit" to describe Hillary to be highly sexist, a not-too-subtle attempt to brand her by drawing on negative associations to her gender.

She's wearing a suit. Why not call it a suit?

[Jim Sagle]

8. That's a lie. When I use empty suit and empty pantsuit in the same phrase,

also repeatedly, it disproves your silly accusation.

[Gabi Hayes]

29. ahhhh haaahhhh HAHHHH!

where've you been lately?

btw, I told John McCain that B*** was an empty suit when I called in to Talk of the Nation during he 2000 campaign

remember the TOTN thread at Table Talk? it was funs sussing out what a worthless POS Juan Williams was back then, even before he showed his true colors by signing on with Fox

[Jim Sagle]

33. Yes, Juan's another empty suit.

A Media Liberal - one who's liberal every day except today, on every issue but THIS one.

[noamnety]

41. When you use it repeatedly

to draw distinctions between the genders or to remind us, always, she's not a "normal" suit, but one that needs that marker to remind us she's not a guy, she's different, it doesn't disprove anything. Why not ask yourself why you are so drawn to that phrase, "empty pant suit? You use it a lot. It hit me, because the thread I read right before this, just by chance, had you using the same exact phrase. It's not accidental, at this point it's an obvious repetition of that phrase that you're using, and very obviously a gender-based image.

Why is that? What are you after by repeating it so many times here?

[1corona4u]

43. You know that picture..

you have as your avatar? That is exactly the kind of look that John does that makes me despise him....he talks out of the corner of his mouth, LOL....not trustworthy....goofy pic by the way...

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

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

[Jim Sagle]

70. Your grasp on empty sound bytes is good - your grasp of what actually matters, not so good.

[pnwmom]

54. No, you're just digging your heels in. lwfern was right. n/t

[Jim Sagle]

71. No, lwfern was wrong.

That was easy.

[aquart]

16. Because she calls it a pantsuit?

There is a distinction in suits in male and female dress. A woman's suit is a jacket and skirt. A man's suit is a jacket and pants. When women wear a jacket and pants, we distinguish by calling it a pantsuit.

It's the correct term even though it is dictated by gender differences in dressing. Either Hillary looks bad in a regular woman's suit with a skirt, or she hates pantyhose as much as I do. Since I'm not voting for a runway model, I don't care if she wears a pantsuit. It's appropriate dress and that's all I'm scoring on.

[spooky3]

64. no, there is nothing wrong with calling what Clinton wears a "suit"

There is nothing inaccurate about it. A suit that includes a skirt instead of pants can be called a suit or called a "skirted suit", as John Malloy used the term in "Dress for Success." Further, these days, women professionals are far more likely to wear suits with pants than with skirts than they did when Malloy was writing in the 70s.

There is absolutely no reason to create a special term to call attention to what she's wearing as compared to the men. The burden is on the one who wants to single out women to have a really good, non-sexist reason for why a generic terms can NOT be appropriately used. It's like calling someone a "lady lawyer." "Lawyer" will do perfectly well.

[pnwmom]

77. If they're going to put her in a "pantsuit," they can put the men in them, too.

It's not like the men couldn't be wearing formal kilts, and those are skirted suits.

[mitchtv]

40. Oh Please

empty suit/pantsuit? It's an insult allright, but not to her gender

[noamnety]

79. Ask yourself this:

Why is he using that term now a half dozen times a day, even after being called out on it? Not an empty suit, which is a recognized term with a specific meaning, but specifically "empty pantsuit" which draws specific attention to her gender by making a point of altering an established bit of slang?

Do a search. Either he's got pantsuit tourettes, or he's trying to make a specific point, one which he apparently doesn't feel he can make by merely calling her an "empty suit."

[mitchtv]

82. If he says 'Suit' on a woman , it implies a skirt

so 'pants suit' seems right. 'Empty skirt" sounds better, but that doesn't work. When she said 'asbestos' all i could hear in my mind was "liar, liar, pants on fire". So, i thought it was a stupid comment for her.

[noamnety]

84. Why not just "empty suit" for her, though?

We use the phrase to refer to men who might, at that moment, be wearing something entirely different than a suit. But I've never heard someone say "he's an empty pair of khaki pants and a work shirt." And that's because the phrase doesn't actually refer to what they are literally wearing at all. It means: "an ineffectual executive" or a phony who's pretending to know what they are doing.

But we keep (and by we, I mean Jim) drawing attention to her GENDER every time we alter that turn of speech, in a way that puts that front and center. We're not altering it because we are so concerned that we will misrepresent what she wore at a particular event - the details of what she wore at a specific event is a nonissue, just as it's a nonissue for men.

What Jim's drawing attention to is that she's not just an ineffectual executive, but that she's OMG an ineffectual FEMALE executive.

[mitchtv]

89. better stop using"she"

it also calls attention to "its" gender

[DemocratSinceBirth]

The "Empty Pantsuit" Knocked Johnny Boy On His Ass Thursday Night

Go to the 55 second mark... The cat in the white shorts was Johnny Boy:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h9xMgvOxmY

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. The "Empty Pantsuit" Knocked Johnny Boy On His Ass Thursday Night

Go to the 55 second mark... The cat in the white shorts was Johnny Boy:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h9xMgvOxmY

[Jim Sagle]

17. So full of it that you had to take two shits, huh?

[Clintonista2]

19. Don't be angry

I know your guy tanked last debate, but let's be honest... he never really had a chance to begin with.

[aquart]

24. Let's wait till the votes are counted on that, shall we?

[Clintonista2]

27. There's nothing worse than false hope

But to each his own, I suppose.

[Jim Sagle]

25. Pride goeth before a fall.

A victory for Hillary, BTW, would be a victory not for you but for the corporations which are fucking you. Enjoy the ride.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. Talking Of Excrement

The way Hillary put her foot up Johnny Boy's ass Thursday night I'll bet he had to go a gastroenterologist before he could use the bathroom again...

Ha Ha Ha

[Jim Sagle]

30. See #25.

When you laugh it up for Hillary you're selling your own future down the river. How clever is that?

[Clintonista2]

31. What does Edwards give us?

Other than a finger in the wind?

[Jim Sagle]

37. Other folks never change their minds, do they? Or is it that other folks don't admit it?

[SaveElmer]

42. Let's see...

China Trade, NAFTA, State Right to work laws, drivers licenses for undocumented workers, IWR, Yucca Mountain, an on and on

There is changing your mind and then there is trying to hide the fact that your record contradicts nearly every position you have taken in this campaign...

All the while attacking others on their records...

[yourout]

45. Wow....that's rich. Hillary is a politcal weathervane is there ever was one.

[Forkboy]

51. Um, you support the model of "finger in the wind" politics.

[cali]

35. you do seem to have a rather strange fascination with

excrement.

[Jim Sagle]

38. Not really...there's just so much of it on this board.

The empty suit and the empty pantsuit and their groupies talk a lot of shit.

[Tellurian]

62. Check out John Boy's Senate Voting Record..

He's a pariah in "sainted" sheeps clothing.

[madfloridian]

68. I admire Edwards. Your posts turn me off to Hillary.

Because I see the same arrogance in them that I have seen lately in her campaign.

[JVS]

69. !

[rocktivity]

3. And the saddest thing, Obama had the exact same thing done to HIM

when Hillary expected him to apologize for remarks David Geffen had made!

Obama did right by responding quickly. Obama did right by responding personally. But it was NOVAK, not Hillary, that he should have told to put up or shut up!


rocknation

[sufrommich]

9. Agreed, If he doesn't have real evidence that Clinton

is behind this,it will not bode well for his campaign. Taking the bait from right wing sources is poison.

[rocktivity]

12. Yeah, you'd think the madrassah smear would have taught him that.

rocknation

[Clintonista2]

11. It was a rookie mistake fitting of a rookie candidate. n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. I Think The Clinton Team Should Ask For A Personal Apology

But that might be overplaying it...

Who's advising him?

These guys:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

39. yup.

[depakid]

15. "He looks like a rookie"

He IS a rookie on the national scene.

[aquart]

22. Yes. And taking the knocks with good grace is vital.

Yes, Nixon came back after saying "You won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore," but NO ONE should take Nixon as a role model.

[depakid]

28. Indeed

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

32. Actually, the right thing to do was to do nothing.

There is no percentage in acknowledging gossip and blind items.

Whatever you say is lose-lose... it just advances a story you don't want advanced.

Respond forcefully to real accusations. But before they are real accusations, say nothing.

(It would be crazy for Hillary to release a statement denying she's a lesbian, for instance.)

[geek tragedy]

34. He learned from Kerry. Respond swiftly and forcefully. n/t

[cali]

36. no. this is not analogous. Kerry responded/didn't respond

to an organization putting out crap about him. Obama is attacking Clinton on nothing but a blind item by, of all people, Novak. The difference is clear.

[Dawgs]

47. The difference is clear to someone that doesn't support Obama.

Him asking Clinton to answer these questions(which she hasn't) is right(and clear) to the rest of us.

[jonnyblitz]

49. oh please, what is clear and right to "the rest of us" is that Obama

is going after the WRONG person for this. He needs to go after Novak NOT Hillary. You Obama supports seem to have a problem with this VERY SIMPLE CONCEPT.

[Cameron27]

52. Yep

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. He Missed The Target

He should have slapped Novak...

He attacked the wrong target... If Obama was president during WW ll and the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor he would have attacked Norway...

[Phunktified]

48. Hillary's campaign couldn't have planned this better

I mean, Obama reading Novak and then attacking Hillary, WTF?? Is it really that easy to throw Obama off his game? His campaign is just not very smart. I mean David Axelrod, c'mon, he didn't exactly prove himself a genius with Edwards in '04 but still, he did better then probably most people thought he might. You would think though that he wouldn't play into the Hillary campaign's hands so easily.

[Colobo]

50. Blooper? I think it was a masterful thing to kill the story as it came out.

Neither Clinton nor Novak could swiftboat him.

[SaveElmer]

55. Now he is the one doing the swiftboating...

Amateur hour in the Obama campaign...

[jefferson_dem]

57. Typical "say anything / do anything for political advantage" by the Clinton camp...

Only this time it didn't work.

Ughhh... Can we be done with them yet?

[SaveElmer]

60. It's pretty disapointing to see you getting into bed with people like Novak...

All for the purpose of smearing a fellow Democrat you cannot defeat on the issues....

Just taking after your candidate I guess...

This is gonna kill any chance Obama had...

[ClarkUSA]

53. Hillary accepts money from Murdoch, plants stories with Drudge; why not slip a rumor to Novak, too?

Hillary will do anything with anybody if it helps her win the nomination.

"Politics is a blood sport." ~ Bill Clinton

[dkf]

72. Yup, Hillary has been dancing with a lot of repub slimers

It's all about winning to her. She'll do anything she needs to.

[ClarkUSA]

74. You got that right.

Remember Bill Clinton's political motto?

"Politics is a blood sport."

Well, it looks as if Obama bit them (and it is THEM) back and drew some blood of his own.
The Clinton campaign would never have responded if it weren't true. They almost always
follow the "No Comment" rule.

Ha ha. This prevents Hillaryworld from pulling anymore attempts at swiftboating who
appears to be her top obstacle to being the nominee - Obama - without accusing eyes
instantly falling on them.

Checkmate. The Queen is dead.

[leftynyc]

90. And what will you do if she wins the

nomination? Will you vote for her or become irrelevant?

[madfloridian]

56. Let's call off the rest of the primaries...

Save all our money and headaches, and let Hillary have it. Coming to DU now is like a slap in the face to those who saw the debate and the post debate as it really was. She has been inevitable from day one, and we all know it.

Money wins, power bases win, we all know it.

[ClarkUSA]

58. What would Howard Dean say/do?

I'm sure he's disgusted. I understand how you felt in 2003-4 now.

[cali]

61. whoa. Iowa is a three way tie and in NH Clinton has slipped

7 pts. It's hardly all over. That's just defeatist.

[madfloridian]

63. Whoa...you gotta be woofing me, cali.

All you gotta do is come to DU and hear all about it. Obama and Edwards all picking on that gal in the race.

It is like that here you know. I feel it and I have never started a post against her. I feel the arrogant putdowns if we question.

The party machinery will destroy anyone who gets in its way. They did it in 2004, and they are doing it in Florida, and they are going to do it nationally.

Our party machinery is just about the same now as that of the GOP. And one does not put up barriers. If one does, the whole media and the machine collapse down on that person.

Some survive and some don't. I admire the ones who survived and went on to make a difference.

The Clintons were for this war, and we are not even supposed to question it.

And I am now a pariah in Florida for all my writings about the primary. They consider me an outsider now, the few who know who I am.

It's a feeling of not belonging because the truth was laid bare.

[cali]

65. whatever. n/t

[democratsin08]

66. obama doesnt seem too smart

what exactly qualifies him to be president?

[madfloridian]

67. Only Hillary is smart enough, right?

Obama not smart, Edwards not smart. That's the gist of the deal at DU.

[MethuenProgressive]

75. mad, do you think Clinton would've got played the way Obama was?

Novak played him. An experienced candidate wouldn't have. She'd have laughed at Novak, not believed him and had a public temper tantrum.

[madfloridian]

76. I think Obama was right. Novak may have been fed stuff.

Whatever the case, the media will decide won't they?

[democratsin08]

80. not true

edwards is smart enough to be of the evil rich, lol

[illinoisprogressive]

78. No. Obama was brilliant in taking it to Hillary. Put up or STFU.

[zulchzulu]

85. Exactly

The Clintons are getting desperate now and know that if they get their ass kicked in Iowa (they will...), then this whole Inevitability Coronation is doomed.

They will sink to no end to try to fulfill their dynastic fantasies.

[DURHAM D]

86. My thoughts - Obama is trying to get in front of a story.

A story that someone has about him that will be getting out. They are trying to manage it in such a way that they can blame Hillary for playing dirty politics and thus re-direct attention to her and away from the story.

Obama needs it out now instead of five weeks from now. It is even possible that the Obama campaign is responsible for spreading it around D.C. If Obama had said nothing it would have gone unnoticed - his campaign wanted the Novak article elevated so they keep talking about it.

Politics is never what it seems.

[jefferson_dem]

87. Politics is never what it seems, indeed!

My guess is there's more to this story...

And it's not even close to what you're predicting. Let's just say, "the tables will be turned."