Last night in Indiana, Obama came out swinging to justify his remarks about PA voters. Today, Obama says he erred.

[Obama] said on Saturday he erred in how he expressed the concerns of those voters...Obama told a campaign rally in Muncie, Indiana, his description was clumsy and did not convey his meaning. "I didn't say it as well as I should have," said Obama,

...Obama said he believed many voters were indeed bitter about the economy and he meant to say "when you're bitter you turn to what you can count on." "So people -- they vote about guns, or they take comfort from their faith and their family and their community," he said. But he said he had not meant to imply that was a bad thing.

"The truth is that these traditions that are passed on from generation to generation, those are important. That's what sustains us," he said.

What he said initially:

Those voters were "bitter" about job losses and other economic woes and so "they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," Obama, an Illinois senator, said.

Is he digging himself into a deeper hole? Clinging to anti-immigrant sentiment isn't a bad thing? Isn't he still saying PA voters harbor anti-immigrant sentiment that have been passed down to them through generations?

The Chicago Tribune has the video to today's comments. He also says the brouhaha over his comments is "a little typical, sort of, political flare up." The AP has more on Obama's newest clarification.

Barack Obama gave an interview to the Advocate about his positions on gay issues. This leapt out at me:

“So I actually have been much more vocal on gay issues to general audiences than any other presidential candidate probably in history.’’

That strikes me about as credible as his comment about his record on anti-semitism:

And nobody has spoken out more fiercely on the issue of anti- Semitism than I have."

I'd call it hyperbole, except his exaggerations are not intentional. He seems to really believe it.

Also, over and over again, on issues that matter to progressives, Obama talks about how fighting for change must be viewed in terms of whether it's worth it to expend political capital to effect it: [More...]

John Mellencamp performing "Small Town" at the DNC in Boston, 2004.

Obama tries to cover his Gaffe (video)-- did he succeed? Seems to me he sidestepped his insults as if he never made them. Where does he address, let alone apologize for this comment?

And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

This is an open thread.

Update: Hillary and McCain respond to Obama's Indiana remarks about his S.F. statement: [More...]

Obama spoke in Indiana today. Here's what he had to say about abortion and the pro-life Dems rhat are supporting him:

Barack Obama said anti-abortion Democrats are backing him because they feel he respects their opinion on the issue despite disagreement on it. ...."It may be that those who have opposed abortion get a sense that I'm listening to them and respect their position even though where we finally come down may be different," he told reporters at a news conference.

"The mistake that pro-choice forces have sometimes made in the past, and this is a generalization so it has not always been the case, has been to not acknowledge the wrenching moral issues involved in it," he said.

"Most Americans recognize that what we want to do is avoid, or help people avoid, having to make this difficult choice. That nobody is pro-abortion, abortion is never a good thing."

Update: Comments Over 200, thread now closed.

Barack Obama's campaign responds to his gaffe about PA voters.

"Senator Obama has said many times in this campaign that Americans are understandably upset with their leaders in Washington for saying anything to win elections while failing to stand up to the special interests and fight for an economic agenda that will bring jobs and opportunity back to struggling communities. And if John McCain wants a debate about who's out of touch with the American people, we can start by talking about the tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans that he once said offended his conscience but now wants to make permanent,”

Looks like news of this gaffe may last the weekend:

His comments have been distributed to allies on Capitol Hill, to members of the Pennsylvania press corps, to talk radio hosts across the country, to Republican state parties and to the congressional campaign committees. The National Republican Congressional Committee is using the statement to whack Chris Carney, an endorser of Obama and vulnerable frosh member of congress from Pennsylvania.

Obama's entire remarks, in context, can be read here.

(This is a continuation of Big Tent's original thread on the gaffe which is about filled up.)

Update: Thread closing, here's a new one for you to continue the discussion.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

Yes, Obama messed up (HuffPo provides audio)

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them... And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Not good. But Obama is a Media Darling and Bill Clinton screwed up today so Obama will get away with it mostly unscathed. That's why he is the better choice for Dem nominee. More . . .

By Big Tent Democrat

Tiger is 9 back at Augusta. Mickleson is tied for 3rd, 3 back. Less prominent players Immelman and Snedeker at the top of the board.

This is an Open thread.

In reading through Hillary Clinton's new anti-crime proposal (background here), my chief interest was who, if anyone, would be subject to increased penalties and what new crimes would she create. My own position is that our criminal sentences, both state and federal, are already draconian and don't need to be raised any higher. We can't jail ourselves out of our crime problem. Smarter approaches are needed.

Here are the existing crimes for which Hillary would ask for greater sentences and the new crimes she would create:

• Online Child Exploitation, Online Sales of Prescription drugs to Minors, and Computer Fraud and Identity Theft

  Hillary will direct the Attorney General to crack down on online child exploitation and harassment through three steps:

• Hillary will sign a new law that makes it a federal crime for an adult to cyberstalk a minor.

• Enlist the private sector to crack down on online prescription drug sales to kids. Hillary will ask credit card companies to prohibit – and police – the use of their services for illegal drug sales to minors. ... At the same time, she will strengthen penalties against fly-by-night online pharmacies that prey on children.

[More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

On Monday, during a press conference call, I asked Howard Wolfson about Clinton supporter PA governor Ed Rendell's criticisms of NBC and NBC's inaccurate coverage of the Trina Bachtel story. I specifically asked if the Clinton campaign would ask NBC to correct its false reporting. Wolfson had no answer for me and Hillary Clinton's campaign has had no answer for the unfair media coverage it has received, particularly from NBC.

What happened instead yesterday and today was Bill Clinton reviving the Tuzla sniper fire story. Instead of a going on the attack against a Media that will never give them a fair shake (a strategy that has paid political dividends before for this campaign), the Clinton campaign instead reopened an old wound of its own. It seems that it is intent on being a Media punching bag. If this is the type of "fight" Hillary Clinton will bring to a general election campaign, then she has no chance. Today, more than ever, I am convinced that Barack Obama is more electable than Hillary Clinton. More . .

By Big Tent Democrat

Again Paul Krugman demonstrates that he gets it:

Not long ago, a young Ohio woman named Trina Bachtel, who was having health problems while pregnant, tried to get help at a local clinic. Unfortunately, she had previously sought care at the same clinic while uninsured and had a large unpaid balance. The clinic wouldn’t see her again unless she paid $100 per visit — which she didn’t have. Eventually, she sought care at a hospital 30 miles away. By then, however, it was too late. Both she and the baby died.

You may think that this was an extreme case, but stories like this are common in America. . . MORE

Update: Praise for Hillary's plan from some American Mayors.

Hillary Clinton outlined her anti-crime proposal in Philadelphia today.

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton would eliminate the federal mandatory five-year sentence for crack cocaine users as part of a $4 billion-a-year anti-crime initiative designed, in part, to steer many nonviolent offenders away from prison.

Hillary signed as co-sponsor of one of the bills to eliminate the crack cocaine disparity, Joe Biden's S. 1711, some months ago. Obama signed onto the same bill recently. (Note: It is not the pending bill I would have signed onto as it contains too many law enforcement provisions and tougher penalties for other crimes.)

Details of the plan are here. Hillary also calls for funding more cops on the street. As for paying for the $4 billion plan: [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

ColumbiaDuck points out this quote from the Walter Shapiro article I wrote about earlier:

[Max] Lesko, speaking for the Obama campaign - "I don't want to sound like a broken record . . . but this campaign is about politics, not policies."

I think this is a gaffe, but it is also something more. Obviously the Clinton campaign can have (and probably will have) a field day with this comment. But the issue is deeper than a political "gotcha" to me. It is a fundamental problem I have had with Barack Obama the politician for three years - his post partisan unity schtick does not argue for a specific agenda of governance. Indeed, Obama has argued against a sharp ideological contrast between Democrats and Republicans. These are mere "labels" in the Obama philosophy. There is not real difference between the parties he often argues.

More . . .