The past haunts Obama?

[Tellurian]

"The Obama campaign Tuesday disavowed a questionnaire he submitted to the Independent Voters of Illinois-Independent Precinct Organization in 1996 to support his state Senate candidacy.

"Obama never saw the '96 IVI-IPO state Senate questionnaire -- it was filled out by a staffer who unintentionally mischaracterized his views on a number of issues," said Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt. LaBolt said the staffer was then-Obama state Senate campaign manager Carol Harwell, who could not be reached Tuesday for comment.

Liberals running in Illinois in the 1990s, especially people like Obama, from the progressive enclave of Hyde Park and independent of Mayor Daley's machine or state Democratic boss Mike Madigan, the speaker of the Illinois House, welcomed the endorsement of the IVI-IPO.

On Tuesday, an article by Mike Allen and Ben Smith on Politico.com, based on the 1996 IVI-IPO questionnaire that they obtained, they said, "from political sources opposed" to Obama's White House bid, "raises questions of whether Obama can be painted as too liberal and whether he is insufficiently consistent."

A poll of Democrats by the New York Times and CBS News published Tuesday concluded Clinton "is viewed by Democrats as a far more electable nominee" than Obama or Edwards.

During a conference call with reporters, Obama said polls asking about electability that include Republicans and independents were more important.

...

Following on the Politico article, the Clinton campaign offered backers who raised questions about Obama's liberal roots during a press call. Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas), referring to Obama's strong anti-gun positions reflected in the 1996 IVI-IPO questionnaire, said she was baffled over how Obama could be "talking about banning all guns" and then "all of a sudden" alter that position."

http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/692594,CST-NWS-sweet12.article

This article was already on the front page of Google...before the "drug story"..

[Lord Helmet]

1. oh keep rubbing that talisman and chanting

[Tellurian]

5. Is that what you're doing?

It seems to have picked up a karmic bolt of lightening and is boomeranging back to Obama..

Keep up the good work.

[Lord Helmet]

6. the boomerang just came back and hit Hillary in the face

[Tellurian]

9. I guess, Obama's SNL mask is coming off and we're seeing the "real" Obama for the first time.

[David Dunham]

2. Obama's lieing. Candidates REVIEW surveys before sending them in.

[emilyg]

22. Of course they do. If he didn't he's stupid.

[Tellurian]

3. Apparently, Obama doesn't care what Democrats think of him..

and why he doesn't care about slinging mud at Hillary..

Obama is interested, he said, in garnering the Republican and Indy vote. Well I say Jolly for him. Why campaign as a Democrat then?

[Lord Helmet]

4. Hillary is the one slinging the mud and everybody knows it.

Three in her camp caught e-mailing accusations of him being Muslim bent on destroying America, her staff calling Obama uppity and presumptuous in thinking he can take the nomination away from her, and now the regurgitation of old news on his teenage drug use.

[Tellurian]

7. Oh, but forget Obama's staff members that have caused trouble right along..

Has Obama ever fired anyone in his camp for mud slinging at Hillary? nope!

you have selective amnesia, dear friend.

[maddiejoan]

24. Again you lie

Nobody in Clinton's staff called Obama uppity.

David Corn asked an unaffiliated democratic operative if he thought the Clinton campaigners thought Obama was "uppity". To which the unaffiliated democratic operative replied "yes".

The three you mention in her campaign were immediately dismissed for their actions, and Clinton herself said she did not condone or authorize Shaheen's statement.

The only mud-slinging going on is Obama's disingenuous claims that he is being attacked.

[earthlover]

14. SO you don't like mud slinging while you sling mud at Obama? Nice....

[maddiejoan]

25. Apparently mudslinging Obama

consists of removing his mask for all to see.

[earthlover]

27. well, apparently, Corn tore off a mask of Clinton campaign for all to see too

[maddiejoan]

30. Well he tried to anyways

But as his column is written from the authoritative stance of interviewing an "un-named democratic operative who is not affiliated with any campaign" it comes across as rather just a slimey hit piece with no substance.

In other words: It's bullshit.

[earthlover]

53. I think one of the points of the operative was that many in the Hillary campaign HATE Obama

Sad...because they are the ones calling those who disagree HATERS!

Hmmm...do I see any hostility here among the Hillaryites towards Obama?

I think so!

So maybe Corn was right!

[Forkboy]

36. You talking about slinging mud is like Bush talking about compassionate conservatism.

[zulchzulu]

8. The past haunts the Clintons? You fucking bet!

Do the Clintons wanna play.

We can go there if ya want. Assholes...

[Tellurian]

10. Eww...I get all tingly when you talk tuff.. ZuZu

[oasis]

41. Wow, Hill was right. This is "fun". But nothing compared to the day when Hill gets sworn in.

:bounce:

[Double T]

11. I think the PAST haunts EVERYONE.

[rufus dog]

12. some more than others

keep up the tactic Hillary supporters

[Jim Sagle]

13. But only if they're Democrats.

[earthlover]

15. since when is politico a good source?

[madrchsod]

16. hmmmmm....another lynn sweet hit job?

"Obama never saw the '96 IVI-IPO state Senate questionnaire -- it was filled out by a staffer who unintentionally mis characterized his views on a number of issues," said Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt."



LaBolt said the staffer was then-Obama state Senate campaign manager Carol Harwell, who could not be reached Tuesday for comment.


so lynn writes an article that the key contention in her piece is not verified but she runs it anyway and will never publish whether she ever reached that staff member. now that`s what i call journalist integrity.

[AX10]

17. Obama is just another politician.

Yet, too many around here see him as a hero who is never to be questioned.

[NewHampster]

18. Tell is again onto some great reading

[Tellurian]

19. All the negativelty and screw ups are from Obama himself..

geeze..forget a race issue...this is a "green" issue!

[CyberPieHole]

20. I agree with you, Tellurian...

The more I read about the Obama/Cocaine story the more I think it will be a major stumbling block if he were to get the nod. I think he was silly to have admitted to it~~~it's liable to come back and bite him on the ass.

:kick: and recommend

[reggie the dog]

50. what

should he have said that he snorted it but that it got caught on some snots in his nose?????

That "I didn't inhale" bs from an earlier Democratic candidate was really convincing.

[CyberPieHole]

52. So snorting coke is now a plus on one's resume?

And what does "I didn't inhale" have to do with it. Nice straw-man. Thanks for your concern.

[reggie the dog]

54. You suggested that

he should not have offered the info. Someone would have likely asked the question. Should he have lied like a previous Democratic candidate about his past drug use? (Who believed that Clinton did not inhale)? What is wrong with having used drugs? Most people that vote Democrat have used illegal drugs before. (So do most people that vote Republican). Haven't you ever used illegal drugs before? I used cocaine a few times, I use cannabis a lot, I used MDMA, LSD, magic mushrooms, and opium too. I think many people on this board have a similar history as do many members of the voting public. So why should candidates lie about or hide their own personal history?

[CyberPieHole]

55. No, actually I have never used illegal substances...

perhaps Obama would not have to be pre-emptively skirting the issue if he had chosen not to imbibe, as well.

[reggie the dog]

57. it is still not an issue

for the half of voters who, like he, have tried illegal drugs.

[autorank]

21. There's a clear inconsistency but this is such a minor form.

I don't see how this damages Obama. These folks have to fill out all sorts of things. Heck ,they vote on bills all the time that they haven't even read.

To me, and probably only a few others (or maybe just me;), these two canceled each other out in the donations flap. Obama noted Clinton took $400,000 form lobbyists (or some large amount). Clinton said that didn't mean they'd bought her vote. Clinton then noted that Obama took $400,000 in bundled contributions raised by the Chairman or some high level board member of The Carlyle Group. Obama said, hey they didn't buy my vote.

Well, got news for both of them, they're both bought by their donors, like most politicians. When you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar and deny liking sweets, people just roll their eyes.

It's an interesting race, though.

[Lerkfish]

23. you know, I applaud this negative attack mode of the clinton campaign

keep doing it, over and over and over again, I'm askin you to! its working so well for you!

don't stop!


:rofl:

[maddiejoan]

26. Please make sure that Obama

responds to all attempts at revealing his true nature as an attack.

It looks so good on him.

[Lerkfish]

28. I'm not an obama supporter

so go tell him yourself

[sniffa]

32. yet another Obama supporter who can't defend him

;)

[maddiejoan]

33. really?

You seem to be up his ass in almost every thread

[Forkboy]

38. Yeah, Lerkfish has been a HUGH defender of Obama.

:rofl:

[Lerkfish]

39. If anything, I've clearly pointed out that Kucinich is more suited to my politics

but that I'll more likely vote for edwards or Biden in the primary, I haven't really decided yet. My primary is months away.

[Lerkfish]

40. no, you don't understand at all, I am just sick of team clinton's tactics

its not rocket science. I just dont' like to see highly negative and slimey campaign mudslinging, and at the moment, the compaign of HRC is most guilty of that.

and her supporters here are most loud, virulent and relentless, and I like to balance things out when its severely unbalanced. That's me.

what about you?

[maddiejoan]

42. I disagree with you

Currently the slimiest shit is coming from Obama's camp.

Painting each legitimate critique of Obama as a "shrill desperate attack".

I marvel that people are falling for this crap.

At least Clinton's comments have factual basis. Obama is never about facts. Not when he raises issues of positive "Hope", and even less when he raises negative imagery of those who dare to rip off his carefully crafted mask. Obama is all about "feeling" with no substance. Positive or Negative.

Obama's tactic of appearing the victim might be working on some people, but it is not working on me.

[Lerkfish]

43. go ahead disagree, but do try to get your facts straight next time, ok?

don't make false assumptions based on your own prejudices. thanks.

[maddiejoan]

45. I would say the same to you.

ok?

[Lerkfish]

51. what facts do I have wrong?

none.

You mistakenly called me an Obama supporter..

so.you.were.wrong.

[BenDavid]

29. elmer gantry is alive and well---obama

[mtnsnake]

31. Not only is Hillary the most electable of all candidates but the most electable Democrat since Bill

She is the Republican's worst fucking nightmare.

[PresidentObama]

46. Not sure what your post has to do with the OP, but prove it?

Polls show Obama and Edwards leading by bigger margins in head-to-head match up's. She's shown a pattern of trailing, tieing, and barely beating the leading GOPers in the head-to-head polling.

Multiple polls show that 50% of America won't under any circumstance vote for her.

She is the most polarizing Democrat since Bill. She literally rallies the Republican base, doesn't gain the independent vote, and many Democrats have lukewarm opinions of her. If she wins, it's by a very narrow margin that risks Democrats not gaining the bigger majority we need in the Congress.

So how is she the most electable?

[mtnsnake]

47. What's it got to do with the OP? Read the OP again. This time read the entire post

Here, I'll save you time. This, right from the OP:

A poll of Democrats by the New York Times and CBS News published Tuesday concluded Clinton "is viewed by Democrats as a far more electable nominee" than Obama or Edwards.

That's what my post had to do with it.

[Apollo11]

34. Most gun nuts will vote GOP in any event

Most rational people don't believe that more guns will make us all safer.

Most of us here on DU understand that if you are running for President you have to choose your battles.

There are a number of issues where there is no perfect solution, because of where we are starting out.

Any gun control proposal has to be considered in the context of how many guns are already "out there".

If it turns out that Obama is a true-blue LIBERAL at heart then it only make me like him more.

[benEzra]

44. You'd be surprised...

[zulchzulu]

35. As the Hillary Blimp falls, they pull out a 9-year old state Senate questionnaire...

This is a riot!

In the recent attacks on Obama where the "fun" begins, a kindergarten "term paper", then a third grade "paper", then the teen years where some drugs were used and here we are, le piece de resistance, some state Senate questionnaire filled out by a staffer nine years ago.

:shrug:

[Stop Cornyn]

37. Where's cali in this thread?

[DrFunkenstein]

48. Wow, This Questionaire Could Really Sink Obama

Mitt Romney (Massachusetts) and Giuliani (Manhattan) are really going to tear into him for moderating his gun views. those guys have held some of the most pro-gun positions in GOP history.

Oh wait, I meant to say this is a ridiculous attempt to scare voters away from Obama to Hillary Clinton, who has been very pro-gun for many, many years.

[William769]

49. K&R!

[redqueen]

56. The gun issue? Is that it?

Jesus... why anyone pays much attention at all to the joke media is beyond me.