More of what the Republicans annihilated John Kerry with: Americans don’t like Flip-Flopping. It’s an easy attack for Republicans to make, and it’s effective too. Remember all those sandals people waived in the air during the GOP convention in New York? HillBuzz hates those things, and we don’t want to see any of them in Denver this August. If Obama is the nominee, there will be sandals a-plenty.
This is exactly the sort of thing the Republicans annihilated Kerry as a Flip-Flopper for in 2004:
It’s still a long way until May 13th, but the latest Rasmussen poll has Hillary Clinton ahead by 55%-27% in West Virginia (our favorite Virginia).
HillBuzz has noticed an absence of “Judgment” signage at Obama rallies lately. They used to be a favorite banner of his campaign, since he claimed one speech in 2002, delivered from the isolated safety of Springfield, IL, proved he had better judgment than any candidate in the race (even though he never followed up on that speech with any action to stop the war, and subsequently voted to approve all funding measures for the war when he was elected to the United States Senate).
But, there’s little talk of judgment now that Jeremiah Wright and Antoin “Big Tony” Rezko are in the news.
Because Obama has myopic judgment when it comes to those around him. Jeremiah Wright was not just an advisor, and not someone he picked up recently in this campaign. He’s not the pastor of a church Obama visited once. Jeremiah Wright is a longtime personal friend of Barack Obama, as well as his spiritual advisor. There are many people Obama could have chosen to fill that role in his life, and many churches he could have chosen to belong to in Chicago. But, he chose Wright. He chose to become a member of a church, for 20+ years, that preached hatred and divisiveness.
This is Obama’s judgment at work. The same judgment that allowed him to get far too comfortable with Big Tony Rezko, one of the dirtiest political fixers in Chicago (and that’s saying a lot, trust us).
Or just words?
Howard Wolfson went straight at Obama on his state senate records and schedules, which have miraculously “disappeared.” The point was Obama’s lack of transparency, compared to what Hillary has released. From the campaign, via the call (and follow up release):
“11,000 pages of the former First Lady’s schedules are now part of the public record and I believe that is approximately 11,000 more documents than the Obama campaign has released up until this point relating to any part of his service especially as a State Senator. … ..
When these documents were released and we had a chance to look at them online, we put out a statement about them and in that statement we called on Senator Obama again to release relevant documents and information from his tenure in the State Senate relating to his schedule, to memos, to letters that he may have written to state agencies perhaps on behalf of Mr. Rezko or others. .. …
We’ve heard different answers from Senator Obama about this when asked about it. At one point he said he had documents, another point he said he did not have documents. Apparently he left his office with nothing. … ..
But we have 11,000 documents in the public record as of today. Senator Clinton has, as many of you know, been the subject of some 60 books. She is in many respects an open book. Senator Obama on the other hand has not been forthcoming with critical information about his tenure. From what I understand Chicago newspapers have multiple FOIA requests into state agencies in Illinois for basic information about Senator Obama’s correspondence with them. Senator Obama should do everything he can to release that information, to speed up that process in Illinois. If he has the letters that he wrote and the responses that he received, which he may well, he should just go ahead and release them, he doesn’t have to wait until the FOIA request has run its course. … ..
There is much that Senator Obama can do on the subject of disclosure if he chooses to make this an issue as he has. I think in many respects he has gotten a free ride on this but there is a voluminous amount of information that presumably should be available relating to his tenure in the State Senate that he could release and make available at any time since he thinks that this is so important. I would again call on him to do so.” – Howard Wolfson
HillBuzz finds people are asking important questions about Obama and Wright:
many people, including Obama supporters, may still have two questions that Senator Obama’s speech did not sufficiently answer, at least in my opinion. And, for any Democrat whose priority is to win back the White House in 2008, they need to be answered now — because, if Senator Obama ends up the party’s nominee (I am a supporter of Senator Clinton’s) — for sure Senator McCain will insist they be answered in the fall.
These two questions are:
1. If a white minister preached sermons to his congregation and had used the “N” word and used rhetoric and words similar to members of the KKK, would you support a Democratic presidential candidate who decided to continue to be a member of that congregation?
2. Would you support that candidate if, after knowing of or hearing those sermons, he or she still appointed that minister to serve on his or her “Religious Advisory Committee” of his or her presidential campaign?
I hope my message gets to someone in the Obama campaign — or to a reporter traveling with the Senator — who can persuade Senator Obama to answer them directly. As I just wrote, he will have to do so — either now or perhaps in the fall.
Use the above link to ask Obama a question on Larry King!
“Senator Obama, please explain why you vociferously denounced Don Imus after his remarks on the Rutgers basketball team, and went on multiple networks to call for Imus’ removal from NBC, all the while knowing what your friend and spiritual advisor, Jeremiah Wright, was saying every week from the pulpit of Trinity United was far, far worse than anything Don Imus said with one remark on one morning of his radio show. Why is it that you felt compelled to speak out about Don Imus, but remained silent about Jeremiah Wright for 20+ years?”
ABC News is not falling for it: ABC Exposes A Year of Contradictions from Obama on Jeremiah Wright's Hatemongering
There is more than a year of contradictions from Obama on Jeremiah Wright, and Obama’s denials about knowledge of Wright’s hatemongering. Both Barack Obama and his friend and supporter Oprah Winfrey remained members of the Trinity United Church of Christ for over 20 years, while so much hate was rained down onto the congregation by Jeremiah Wright.
Hypocrite! Obama called for IMUS firing after one remark — but did not leave Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years!
“There is nobody on my staff who would be working for me if they said anything like that about anybody or any ethnic group”
“Imus feeds into the worst stereotypes that my two daughters are having to deal with today in America…it is a degrading comment and not one I am interested in supporting”.
Why is Barack Obama so outraged by one remark from Don Imus on the radio, but sat in the pews at Trinity United Church of Christ and listened to the hatemongering of Jeremiah Wright week after week after week?
Where was Obama’s outrage then?
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
A Broadside to Obama’s Likability
One of my regulars articulates the view of more than a few of my readers… That they may have, at one point or another, found Obama personally likable, even if they strongly disagreed with his policy views. No longer:
For so many reasons, the speech was revolting. He needed a full-throated condemnation, and he didn’t give it.
But I think you identified the most offensive: “jarring to the untrained ear.”
Yeah. “God-d*** America” is only jarring because I have an “untrained ear.” If I were a musician, it wouldn’t bother me.
[To heck with] him. And if he finds that sentiment “jarring,” maybe it’s because he has an “untrained ear.”
Where do I sign up to help Amnesty John?
Over in the Corner, Derb too notes that he is “starting to really dislike Obama.”