home

Obama's Response to His Gaffe

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:40:37 PM EST
Tags: Barack Obama, 2008 (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

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.

< Obama's Gaffe | Obama Explains Why Pro-Life Dems Support Him >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Obama's Response to His Gaffe | 263 comments (263 topical)
    Wow (5.00 / 5) (#79)
    by Steve M on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:20:53 PM EST
    This was just an amazing, world-class gaffe.  I really can't believe he had the poor judgment to say this.

    I really don't think the strategy of engaging in a full-throated defense, John Kerry-style ("I will not let the right-wing focus on a botched joke distract us from the real issues...") is really the right call here.  I guess we'll see.

    I expect the blogosphere will love Obama's defense, not only because they love everything Obama does, but because they believe his statements about small-town Pennsylvania are basically true.

    Right on. (5.00 / 7) (#88)
    by OrangeFur on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:25:33 PM EST
    This wasn't in my copy of our grand plan to win back the votes of people who think Democrats are too elitist and disdainful of middle America.

    Also, if you're going to go around insulting working class folks, you shouldn't first show off how bad you are at bowling. :)

    [ Parent ]

    x (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Mary Mary on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:29:22 PM EST
    His statements are NOT TRUE! Bitter people here in small-town PA who can't get good jobs drink beer and ride three-wheelers. Gosh-darned elitist!

    [ Parent ]
    And (5.00 / 2) (#104)
    by Steve M on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:33:43 PM EST
    they cling to guns!  and religion!

    I wonder if anyone will put two and two together and speculate about what sort of bitterness led Obama to cling to his particular church.  Or maybe it's only the little people who do everything out of bitterness.

    [ Parent ]

    Look (5.00 / 6) (#114)
    by sas on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:36:57 PM EST
    I know small town Pennsylvanians, being from PA.

    These people were religious, and loved their guns before they lost their jobs.  This amatuerish attempt to explain their way of life and what they hold dear will be the death knell of his campaign there.

    They will not like being told they are xenophobic in response to losing their jobs.

    The man is an idiot when it comes to common sense and the lives of the average person.

    [ Parent ]

    Thank you--I don't know small town PA, but I do (none / 0) (#241)
    by jawbone on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:54:43 PM EST
    know small town Wisconsin. And you are quite right.

    [ Parent ]
    Jawbone, where in Wisconsin? (none / 0) (#266)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 10:05:05 PM EST
    I'm in the big city here, but you know it's been called the biggest small town in the country -- and I've lived in small towns in Wisconsin, too, and can only agree.  We all have a lot in common with the folks in Pennsylvania, and I can imagine how this would play here, whether in Mwokee or Lodi or Potosi.  Obama is sunk in the Midwest now, except for Chicago . . . and even then, only the most urban areas of Chicago.

    [ Parent ]
    What he said is not a gaffe; (5.00 / 2) (#154)
    by felizarte on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:51:43 PM EST
    the gaffe is saying what he felt.

    [ Parent ]
    Exacto (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:58:26 PM EST
    I am not surprised.  His followers think the same of most Americans.  They diminish them and put them down.  So, I am not surprised.  

    [ Parent ]
    I'm sure you have a study to back (none / 0) (#173)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:59:54 PM EST
    up your claims? It's my understanding that only factual information is allowed on this site.

    [ Parent ]
    Yeah...his speeches. (5.00 / 2) (#186)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:08:18 PM EST
    the new age feel good advertising pharma language speak...saying nothing, standing for nothing...but making everyone feel good about nothing.  Obama reinvented nihilism.  

    [ Parent ]
    That doesn't back (none / 0) (#213)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:23:08 PM EST
    up your claim. I hope that you are asked to retract your statement.

    [ Parent ]
    Right. (none / 0) (#195)
    by OrangeFur on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:12:54 PM EST
    As Michael Kinsley has said before, a gaffe is what happens when a politician says what he really thinks.

    [ Parent ]
    several good ources for (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by dem08 on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:25:58 PM EST
    thinking about what this says about Obama are michellemalkin, hot  air, and several of the non-Progressive blogs.

    At least they know an important story when they see one.

    If SNL is new this week, perhaps they will have a sketch about the elitists Obama's contempt and completely stupid comment that people who lost their jobs 25 years ago are frustrated because everyone promises them an improved life which has not come.

    Who would think we would have to go to the conservatives to see how bad and stupid Obama is.

    Sure... (none / 0) (#224)
    by mbuchel on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:26:55 PM EST
    Because we know the Right Wing Noise Machine will have a very fair assessment of any democrat.
    Have you already forgotten what the smear machine did to the Clintons in the 90's?
    So you don't like Obama - I get it.  But let's not look for validation from the RWNM and co-opt their language, deal?


    [ Parent ]
    To me (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:33:06 PM EST
    this all brings up the specter of the "Macaca moment".

    And it's a ghost that certainly sends a chill up my leg, but not in the Chris Matthews sense.

    That San Fransisco fund-raiser was quite something (5.00 / 5) (#126)
    by ajain on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:40:59 PM EST
    I mean he came up with his ridiculous foreign policy cred rationale and trashed middle america all at once.

    Somehow that just seems too much to take.

    You get to see his arrogance and his elitism all at the same time. That's just amazing.

    Obama behind closed doors . . . (none / 0) (#171)
    by nycstray on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:58:41 PM EST
    don't forget this part of his FP remarks:

    "It's ironic because this is supposedly the place where experience is most needed to be Commander-in-Chief. Experience in Washington is not knowledge of the world. This I know. When Senator Clinton brags 'I've met leaders from eighty countries'--I know what those trips are like! I've been on them. You go from the airport to the embassy. There's a group of children who do native dance. You meet with the CIA station chief and the embassy and they give you a briefing. You go take a tour of a plant that [with] theassistance of USAID has started something. And then--you go."

    "You do that in eighty countries--you don't know those eighty countries. So when I speak about having lived in Indonesia for four years, having family that is impoverished in small villages in Africa--knowing the leaders is not important--what I know is the people. . . ."

    That was quite a talk he had there. Too bad Mr New Media forgot himself and New media  ;)

    [ Parent ]

    Harvard Brainiac, part deux (none / 0) (#259)
    by ineedalife on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:46:09 PM EST
    Papa Bush skewered Dukakis and his ivory tower worldview with the Harvard Brainiac quip. Here it comes again.

    [ Parent ]
    DailyKos (5.00 / 3) (#127)
    by boredmpa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:40:59 PM EST
    I never read DailyKos, found this site through Krugman at some point I think.  But anyway, I can't believe "The field's" update over there.

    "In fact, he was saying that rural Pennsylvanians are not racist! "

    What Kool-Aid are people drinking?  Obama said racism wasn't the only thing going on, he said there were issues believing a 47 yr old african american AND issues trusting gov't after the clinton and bush admins.  I suppose one could view saying racism isn't the only issue as progress.

    He seems to be saying (5.00 / 4) (#201)
    by badger on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:15:40 PM EST
    "They used to just hate black people, but now they hate the government, foreigners and black people."

    [ Parent ]
    ugh (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by proudliberaldem on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:45:52 PM EST
    i'm so frustrated by the press defending this as 'brave truth telling'.  1) once again the press is being presumptuous in telling voters how they should interpret everything and 2) it was a dismissive and insulting comment.  maybe he meant well and just misspoke.  and yes, we can and should have intelligent discussion about how economic fears feed   anti-immigrant sentiments.  but the way he said it, and where he said it, was patronizing and demeaning.    

    Well (none / 0) (#144)
    by Steve M on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:48:32 PM EST
    There's a perfectly reasonable way to make the claim that immigrants get unfairly scapegoated when times are tough.  In fact, I've heard Obama do exactly that, most notably at the Los Angeles debate.

    It's when you start throwing guns and God in there as things that people cling to for psychological reasons that you start having a problem.

    [ Parent ]

    precisely (none / 0) (#159)
    by proudliberaldem on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:54:19 PM EST
    and i actually liked that Obama comment at the LA debate.

    [ Parent ]
    Another confirmation (none / 0) (#149)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:49:45 PM EST
    "The press is elitist and liberal" need the RNC say anything more?  

    [ Parent ]
    Political games (none / 0) (#258)
    by bison on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:44:15 PM EST
    I feel like I'm being played both ways.  Do you really think that he was trying to put down the very people that he is trying to get to vote for him?  It doesn't make sense.  Too many political games on all sides.

    [ Parent ]
    Oh (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by sas on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:47:52 PM EST
    yeah,

    This is just what small town disadvantaged America is looking for....a Harvard educated latte sipping elite to explain their psyche.

    I'm sure they'll be lining up to vote for him.

    Add ten points to Hillary in PA, KY, W VA, and Ind.

    Take a few points away from Obama in NC, Ore, Mont, and SD.

    Imagine the wails when the RNC starts (5.00 / 1) (#239)
    by Practically Lactating on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:51:47 PM EST
    suggesting that elitist Dems "cling" to lattes, wine, and Priuses to assuage liberal guilt.

    [ Parent ]
    Is he talking about ... (5.00 / 3) (#166)
    by dwmorris on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:57:12 PM EST
    the bitter angels of our nature?

    Listen (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by Steve M on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:11:39 PM EST
    You've made the same comment about 20 times in this thread.  Either people are going to buy your interpretation of Obama's comments or they're not.  There is no reason to spam the comment section with the same point.

    how to win hearts and minds... (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by white n az on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:20:05 PM EST
    doesn't seem to be that this is the way but hey, maybe he wins by dismissing small town Pennsylvania by lumping them this way.

    The latest explanation from Indiana tonight (5.00 / 1) (#223)
    by Grey on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:26:48 PM EST
    Obama's comments tonight, as read by Keith Olbermann just a few minutes ago on Countdown:

    "I'm in touch. I know exactly what's going on in Pennsylvania. I know what's going on in Indiana. I know what's going on in Illinois. People are fed up; they're angry and they're frustrated and they're bitter and they want to see a change in Washington and that's why I'm running for President of the United States of America."

    This just won't do.  It just won't do.  It does not explain, nor does it clarify, anything.  I think this makes it worse, actually, but we'll see.

    It smacks of arrogance. (none / 0) (#238)
    by lilburro on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:51:31 PM EST
    You have to show it.  You have to prove you're in touch.  Aside from the fact that a blanket statement like that will never be accurate.  Was he in touch with South Carolina when he sent out McClurkin?  Somehow I think that if I lived in SC I wouldn't have felt so touched by that.

    But no, let's continue alienating hardworking, voting, considerate Americans who make less money than us.  

    [ Parent ]

    It might be better to listen to (none / 0) (#255)
    by waldenpond on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:38:48 PM EST
    in writing it sounds angry and frustrated (bitter).

    I'm in touch. I know exactly what's going on. I know what's going on. I know what's going on. That's why I'm running for President of the United States of America.

    Not good.

    [ Parent ]

    I've seen the video (none / 0) (#262)
    by Grey on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:48:50 PM EST
    It makes it worse.  He starts by saying this:

    "Out of touch?  Out of touch?"  

    And it goes downhill from there.  You can watch it here, the part I quoted starts at 2:25 or so.

    [ Parent ]

    I wish I hadn't watched that (none / 0) (#276)
    by nycstray on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 10:30:48 PM EST
    so dishonest and shifting the blame. maybe he should have played them the audio of what he really said, including the part that implies they could be racist. I'm sure they would like to hear the laughter from the crowd . . .

    [ Parent ]
    It is a gaffe alright! (none / 0) (#256)
    by bison on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:40:22 PM EST
    Why does it make it worst?  Do you really think that he was disparaging working class people in Pennsylvania and across the Midwest?  The very people he is trying to get to vote for him?  Get real!  This is a gaffe, but I mot sure who this gaffe belongs to.

    [ Parent ]
    That's it? "I know." That's it? (none / 0) (#267)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 10:12:01 PM EST
    That's almost as arrogant as the statement he is supposed to correct.  "I know what's going on" -- so just keep clinging to your faith and your guns and your bitterness, just trust the Harvard guy knows."

    I'm running because I know, because I took a bus trip around your state.  And you don't know anything about your lives at all, stupid small-towners.

    Uh huh.

    [ Parent ]

    Gee, I live in one of those small towns. (5.00 / 4) (#229)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:30:57 PM EST
    Must be me he is talking about. Bitter? No. Religious, Bad Catholic. You know the type, Pro Choice and love the holidays. But I am a good bowler. Have trophies that I got when I lived in San Diego and was on a company team. I am employed. My commute is 2 miles and I am an accountant. My house is a 3000 sq ft converted dairy barn on 2 acres. I have a new car and all the other materialistic things I want. My broadband line is faster than my brother's road runner service in Calif. This was a farming community. Now it is a family community. There are no more bitter people than there are in any other state in the union. What, are ALL the people happy in Florida or New York or California?    I am late to the show on this as my cousin who goes back and forth to NJ showed up and wanted to know what day he needed to be back to vote for Hillary. We were discussing politics and I missed this whole thing. But, it sure got me hot. First, he insinuates that all the people do here is bowl. Now we are bitter and gun happy and clinging to religion. Right. I choose to live in a small town with NO stop lights. I can be at a Home Depot in 15mins and Macy's and other box stores in 25min. But everything I need is within 5 miles. I choose to live in a small town because I lived in Ft. Lauderdale & San Diego. I traded traffic for less pay, no mortgage, and a tractor to mow my lawn. I  have traveled to every state including Alaska. I would say I consider myself cosmopolitan and know which fork to use. I could go on but I am calmer now. This Mr.Obama just really is a rookie. He sounds as if he knows the temperature of the people in our small towns but he did not know his friend was a slum lord or his minister was such a radical.    

    Living in a similar (none / 0) (#257)
    by Arcadianwind on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:40:32 PM EST
    setting, I have the same sense of this Mr. obama, and his thinly veiled bigotry. He is the one who is bitter.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm back in the big city now (none / 0) (#269)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 10:18:53 PM EST
    but in a neighborhood where I can walk everywhere, a neighborhood like the small town where I lived much like yours -- and I know what you mean.  A farming community now a family community is a good description . . . but the church is still there, right in the center of town.  Even if you don't go every Sunday, you know its location is more than symbolic in a small town, living a centered life.

    [ Parent ]
    Yep, the church is in the middle of town (none / 0) (#272)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 10:26:33 PM EST
    One bank, a Post Office, 2 restaurants, a hardware store, gas, convenience store, body shop, and a saloon. But the church is not the main concern here. You know if you are passing around 6:30 on a Saturday night, there is the traffic letting out, but even then, it is workable. They have great Fireman's Parades and the 4th of July fireworks over the lake is fantastic. And today I saw my first crocus when I got home and the daffodils are ready to bloom. And people were talking about the large robins this year, the gas prices, and Hillary.  Maybe Obama was talking to the bitter Republicans. Ha!

    [ Parent ]
    Add this to the two minds of Barack Obama -- (5.00 / 0) (#235)
    by Oje on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:47:42 PM EST
    The Hope and Bitterness Campaign for America

    or he could change the name of his tour to:

    The Road to Change or Cynicism Bus

    So when does he give us a speech (5.00 / 1) (#237)
    by ineedalife on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:50:30 PM EST
    lecturing us on the finer points of rural culture in America? He can throw his grandparents even further under the bus. After all they were from Kansas so they must be over-flowing with xenophobic, gun-toting, religion.

    I guess no one in the media will note the irony that in Obama-world bitter rural America "clinging" to religion is implicitly bad, but bitter AA churches gleefully doing the "God Damn America" to vent  frustrations are healthy.

    His comments on it tonight... (5.00 / 1) (#251)
    by mike in dc on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:32:32 PM EST
    ...were pretty good, and he deftly used the fact that Clinton and McCain attacked him on it to counterattack them on their own "working class street cred" problems(McCain needed 3 tries before taking the subprime crisis seriously, Clinton voted for the middle-class-destroying bankruptcy bill).  I'm sure there will be fallout next week, but he can  probably turn it around on Clinton if she attacks him on it at the next debate.

    Bureau of Labor Statistics (5.00 / 7) (#252)
    by jen on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:33:26 PM EST
    "You go into some of 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 they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration--"

    They did?

    This sounds a bit like a backhanded swipe at the Clinton administration-- chronicalling the staggering job loss we all remember during those (ick!) disastrous 90's... This strikes me as yet more historical revisionism. Sorry - but I need to put on my Clark's Army Boots and fight back! :)

    I'm reminded of that Chris Rock routine; "Everything's Clinton's fault. Clinton did it!"

    The Bureau of Labor statistics doesn't seem to agree with Obama on this one. They say that the Clinton years in Pennsylvania were actually very GOOD for jobs! (Caveat: They might be part of the shadowy Clinton Machine...);P

    =========

    Unemployment rate in Pennsylvania when Clinton took office was high-- hovering at just under 8% (7.6- 7.8%)

    During his two-term administration, unemployment rate was cut in half.(Ending right at around 4%) In a steady decline year over year, unemployment went from around half a million unemployed in 1992 to just over 200,000 when Clinton left office. So over a quarter of million Pennsylvanians went OFF unemployment during that time.

    But guess what happened next?

    After Bush was sworn in, the unemployment in PA took an immediate upturn.

    And because we're talking about industrial towns here... this is the graph detailing manufacturing jobs in Pennsylvania from 1992 right up until 2008.

    See that precipitous drop right at... oh look-- at 2000! And then it keeps going down, down, down, all the way to ... 2008. There's your job loss.

    I think Mr. Axelrod should advise Senator Obama that "Clinton did it" is a poor mythology to use when talking economic matters.

    (All statistics from BLS - Bureau of Labor Statistics -- h/t ms in la)

    It's worthwhile to spend a moment (5.00 / 2) (#260)
    by frankly0 on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:47:17 PM EST
    analyzing the ugliest sentence Obama uttered:

    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.

    What do all of the things that Obama says people "cling" to have in common?

    They are, obviously, by Obama, being held in a very real disdain. He is, without question, being disparaging of each item in that list. Each of those things are things people "cling to" because, in their bitterness, they are turning to something negative.

    And what heads that list? Guns and religion.

    Basically, the man has gone out of his way to besmirch two things that tens of millions of voters hold very dear.

    The clear meaning of the statement stands on its own. No amount of "context" could possibly make it go away.

    Well, I don't think (from an electability (4.88 / 9) (#56)
    by tigercourse on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:12:09 PM EST
    standpoint) that this is nearly as bad as Wright, but man it would be nice if Democrats could someday develop the slightest hint of how to run a campaign. We're getting worse at this stuff, not better.

    Telling a bunch of rich guys in San Francisco that people from the midwest are bitter gun lovers and god worshippers (this coming from the very religious Obama) who hate outsiders. That's real smart.

    What an odd thing to say... (4.85 / 7) (#49)
    by OrangeFur on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:10:14 PM EST
    When combined with the "typical white person" comments about his grandmother, one could understand why some people might start thinking that Barack Obama doesn't have a very high opinion of white working class people

    The message seems to be a backhanded compliment: You're good people. Yes, you possess all sorts of negative traits--xenophobia, racial bias, fundamentalism, gun ownership--but don't worry, it's not your fault! It was bred into you, or it's because you're anxious about jobs.

    If this narrative takes root before November, it's going to be pretty bad for Obama.

    actually (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by boredmpa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:32:34 PM EST
    The prior paragraphs to the gaffe involve him pointing out the racial aspect of the situation.  He's basically trying to say there are several things that hurt trust in his message and he's framing it as "not just race."

    So in addition to focusing on bitterness (and blaming it on bush and clinton admins), explaining that bitterness leads to guns/church/xenophobia, he's also addressing the usual race talking point.

    [ Parent ]

    The fact that he's blaming (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by rooge04 on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:08:03 PM EST
    anything like bitterness and xenophobia or anything else at the foot of the Clinton administration makes me physically ill. These days I hear Lewinsky from Obama supporters, not Republicans.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm back (4.80 / 5) (#53)
    by bjorn on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:11:00 PM EST
    Keith doesn't know it was an Obama supporter that put the tape out.  He is making it seem like Clinton must have something to do with it since it happened last Sunday but is only coming out today.

    I watched Olberman... (none / 0) (#226)
    by mbuchel on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:29:29 PM EST
    ...and I certainly didn't get that read.  He asked why it was held for a week, but he certainly didn't accuse the Clintons.

    [ Parent ]
    C'mon Edwards...now be a man (4.75 / 4) (#21)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:55:45 PM EST
    cut Obama loose.  Make a stand.  Stand up for poor Americans.  One America my you know what.  Just like the Republicans, they want their America.  It's the America that got all the benefits of the 60.70, 80 and 90s and their children and now they don't want to let the lower income people in.  They want to lock the alleged gifts of the mythological American meritocracy.  This is the battle.  It's class war.  Edwards had it right.  

    Edwards...needs to come out of hiding (4.75 / 4) (#44)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:07:29 PM EST
    Get him on that one.  He attacked  his reason for running.  Those poor Americans.  I don't think he just attacked white poor americans, he attacked all poor americans. Saying that stuff in Getty's mansion and pretending he is for change.  Geepers kreepers what planet are we on.  

    OK here's KO (4.75 / 4) (#51)
    by waldenpond on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:10:41 PM EST
    I don't care for his show but..... he gave Obama's quotes and said McCain and Clinton are after him like 'starved lions.'  Can I quit watching now?    McCain's comments, Obama response to McCain. It is about cynicism.

    Richard Wolffe trotted out. RW: Plenty to attack Obama about.  Misspoke... cultural issues, guns and religion.  If the debate is about eliticism, Obama has grounds to attack as the other candidates are wealthier than him. (ok)

    KO: Clinton after hm with guns blazing... careful tread?  RW: Back to kitchen sink, of course you pounce.  Obama can say this is how I am coming to terms with voters. (???) Useful diversion from Boznia issue.

    KO:  GOP has called for denouncing Obama's remarks.  Decent people, gun rights, constitution, faith....

    5:10 on to Clinton and Bosnia.

    Although I won't turn on Olbermann (4.75 / 4) (#54)
    by Dave B on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:11:44 PM EST
    I guess he's on his show "providing context" for the statement.

    Good Lord.  I believe that Olbermann feels the same way about Rednecks.

    I live in South Dakota, and I can tell you, Democrats would get a lot more vote here if folks didn't have the perception that they were viewed as "rednecks."  Rural Americans are people too.

    Will tonight's speech (4.75 / 4) (#69)
    by kmblue on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:17:57 PM EST
    go down in history, like the other one did?
    Remember the goal:
    Change the subject

    Good response (4.66 / 3) (#1)
    by dianem on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:43:06 PM EST
    This gives the media the opportunity to report his response before they even report the "gaffe". They like being able to get ahead of the news.

    Lou Dobbs show is (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by bjorn on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:45:51 PM EST
    not cutting him any slack whatsoever. They have been piling on nonstop for 45 minutes now. And they are going until the end of the hour talking about what a HUGE problem this is for Obama. I can't keep watching but I hope someone tells us how KO covers the story in about 16 minutes.

    [ Parent ]
    Hoosiers aren't gonna be happy, either (5.00 / 5) (#4)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:47:43 PM EST
    "If this is the description of small towns in the Midwest that Sen. Obama is telling people in San Francisco, he clearly hasn't spent enough time in Indiana," said the former speaker of Indiana's House, John Gregg in a statement.

    "Those of us who live in small towns across Indiana are hardworking Americans who love and fight for our country, and live where we do because we believe it's the best place to raise our kids and call home," Gregg said.

    "Sen. Obama should focus his campaign on offering plans to help struggling Hoosiers create a better life and not mock them for their small town values and religious beliefs."

    Ouch.  This is gonna come up over and over until the Indiana primary. . . .

    [ Parent ]

    It really depends on how the media... (5.00 / 5) (#35)
    by dianem on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:04:17 PM EST
    ...play this. Right now, it's "Big News".  Unfortunatly, he said this at a time when reporters are a bit light on actual news and people haven't left for summer vacation yet. The Clinton "controversy" is not very significant - even our beloved MSM are going to have a hard time making Bill Clinton's distortions about Hillary Clinton's distortions look interesting. Really, what is the spin? Bill Clinton lies?  Yeah, right. And dogs have fur. Bill Clinton defends wife? Er... that's not really a bad thing.

    But Obama came along with a HUGE gaffe at just the right time. In a just and rational world, this would be news for a week, like the much smaller gaffes of the Clinton campaign. BUT ... this is not a just and rational world. It's Obamaland. Obama provided the media with some fascinating material (Wright) a few weeks ago, the media ran with it, and Obama made a speech which was universally praised (at least in Obamaland) and completely shut down the discussion. Obama has now provided comments on the latest controversy and the media can proceed to discuss the "gaffe" in "context".  If patterns hold, then the next step will be that Obama will clarify his remarks and the media will fall all over themselves praising him for his clarity and vision.

    At the same time... a few more Americans decide to vote for McCain or stay home because they just don't like Obama.  They will decide that Obama is just a bit too sure of himself, just a bit too "audacious".  

    I've decided, by the way... that's going to be how the right attacks Obama. Gore was known for honesty, so they made him out to be a liar. Kerry was known for being courageous, so they made him into a coward. Obama is reputed to be "the common man", so they are going to make him out to be elitist. With Wright and Rezko and now this, he has given them enough material. All they have to do is fill in the spaces.

    [ Parent ]

    A Harvard grad who went to prep school (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:17:21 PM EST
    and talks like an Easterner, whose mother had a Ph.D. (even though as a returning older student, but details get missed), whose father went to Harvard and whose relatives include officials in Kenya, whose grandfather owned a business and whose grandmother was a bank VP . . . uh, the guy is in the elite.

    The GOP won't have to "make" him that.  But will the media use it?  Toobin on CNN and others today tried to tell us that Obama's entire upbringing was in near-poverty, that the Obamas don't make much money compared to the McCains and Clintons, blah blah.

    First, the Obamas make more money than anyone most Americans know.  More to the point, the immediate thought is well, sure, he hasn't made as much yet because he's so much younger than McCain or Clinton.  Hmm, maybe too young . . . and inexperienced?  No way any of this plays well.

    [ Parent ]

    And I'll bet that (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:30:39 PM EST
    win or lose, when Obama returns to the private sector and writes yet another autobiography, receives 6 figure speaking fees, invests in enterprises that return profits...his supporters won't be clamoring for his tax returns or questioning the fact that he has a ton of money.

    [ Parent ]
    We are watching tyranny at work (none / 0) (#123)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:39:52 PM EST
    Information that any one of us can get, in the MSM does not even get out in the fresh air.  

    [ Parent ]
    And your point is (none / 0) (#146)
    by IndiDemGirl on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:49:15 PM EST
    that we shouldn't vote for Obama because he went to Harvard and had parents that were educated? Hillary Clinton's background is even more of the same, yes?  So by your own criteria we shouldn't vote for her either.  

    [ Parent ]
    Heh (none / 0) (#160)
    by Steve M on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:54:22 PM EST
    Hillary's father was a textile salesman who went to Penn State on a football scholarship.  Her mother was a high-school educated housewife.

    Not that I think it's particularly relevant to judge people by their parents.  It just sounded like you might have no clue.

    [ Parent ]

    I am well aware of her background (none / 0) (#182)
    by IndiDemGirl on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:06:57 PM EST
     I happily voted for Bill Clinton and think he was a good President.  I will happily vote for Hillary Clinton if she is the nominee, though it is unlikely that I will vote for her in the upcoming Indiana primary.  I was responding to the comments about Obama's parents and education.   To rule out Obama because he went to Harvard would also rule out Hillary as she attended Wellesley and Yale Law School.  So maybe it is you that have no clue.

    [ Parent ]
    Sorry (none / 0) (#190)
    by Steve M on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:10:10 PM EST
    when you referred to Obama's parents I thought you were actually making a point about his parents.

    [ Parent ]
    Did Harvard allow women then? (none / 0) (#203)
    by nycstray on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:17:26 PM EST
    for some reason I thought she went to Yale because Harvard wasn't an option because of her gender?

    [ Parent ]
    Harvard has been effectively coed (none / 0) (#243)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:12:31 PM EST
    for something like 150 years (Radcliffe College, totally integrated academically with Harvard, just separate dorms, etc.)  Hillary did not go to Yale undergrad, which was all-male at the time.  She only went there for law school.  She went to Wellesley, I believe, but in any case an all-women's college.

    [ Parent ]
    thanks! now I have to figure out why (5.00 / 1) (#261)
    by nycstray on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:47:49 PM EST
    I thought that . . . hmmm, my poor scrambled brain, lol!

    [ Parent ]
    don't know about harvard (none / 0) (#263)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:52:38 PM EST
    I do know that columbia didn't allow women when obama went there in the late 70s/early 80s.

    [ Parent ]
    Harvard officially admitted women in 1972 (none / 0) (#275)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 10:28:45 PM EST
    after she graduated from Wellesley.  

    Women "at" Harvard really went to Radcliffe.  No Harvard on their diplomas.

    [ Parent ]

    Not because of (none / 0) (#183)
    by sas on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:07:18 PM EST
    his background, but because of what he says.

    [ Parent ]
    No the point was.. (none / 0) (#246)
    by ineedalife on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:19:06 PM EST
    that the show the commenter saw was presenting a distorted view of Obama's background. If you had read the thread you would realize that.

    [ Parent ]
    No, Girl, the point is his hypocrisy (none / 0) (#273)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 10:27:19 PM EST
    in painting himself as poor when he wasn't, and as so much more that he isn't that I can't say here.

    And no, Clinton's background is quite different -- she went to public school, he went to a private prep school.  

    And she went to a women's college, and on scholarship.  Why not Harvard?  Well, Harvard wasn't even admitting women then.  Learn history.

    [ Parent ]

    is cable showing pics of Billionaires Row? (none / 0) (#100)
    by Josey on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:31:42 PM EST
    or Getty's house? etc.


    [ Parent ]
    My entry in the How Repugs will Attack Contest (none / 0) (#147)
    by Ellie on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:49:20 PM EST
    I've decided, by the way... that's going to be how the right attacks Obama. Gore was known for honesty, so they made him out to be a liar. Kerry was known for being courageous, so they made him into a coward. Obama is reputed to be "the common man", so they are going to make him out to be elitist.

    Elitism is always a noxious ingredient in the flaming bag of poo, but I'm guessing they'll strategically smear him with every single Bush character defect, rotten tendencies and corruption.

    The basis of my suspicion is as follows:

    It pre-emptively excuses any GOP candidates cho rubber stamped and wagon circled during the dismal Bush / Cheney era.

    It maintains the unfair, lazy standard of automatically outsourcing of half the blame onto Dems ("they all do it"; "a pox on both their houses").

    It's so evil, they just gotta go for it.

    [ Parent ]

    I don't think his response will do well (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by ahazydelirium on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:46:46 PM EST
    in Pennsylvania. Now, it could deflate the effects; however, I think it'll hit the fence sitters. Obama supporters will start the "Oh, he talks to us like adults" meme; Hillary supporters will play up how offensive its implications are; fence sitters, though, could pick a side, depending on how it falls. Personally, I think it'll be played badly in PA. This might help make the primary a blow-out for Hillary.

    [ Parent ]
    In PA (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by sas on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:14:02 PM EST
    Obama's comments are going to piss people off BIG TIME.

    So, when Pennsylvanians get bitter they turn to Guns and God.  What do elitists turn to?

    LATTES?

    [ Parent ]

    Spas. (5.00 / 3) (#92)
    by Ben Masel on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:28:13 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    And self-help books that cost $39.99 each (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by davnee on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:34:41 PM EST
    That's a week's groceries for a family a careful shopper at WalMart.

    [ Parent ]
    Self-help books are a bad idea but (none / 0) (#198)
    by ahazydelirium on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:13:49 PM EST
    a spa trip sounds delightful.

    [ Parent ]
    I thought Dems agreed that the GOP (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:35:07 PM EST
    manipulates white working class voters through religion, the 2nd amendment & xenophobia. Did that stop at some point?

    [ Parent ]
    Yeah, the GOP does (5.00 / 2) (#131)
    by badger on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:44:28 PM EST
    and the electorate responds favorably.

    And you seem to think the way to counter this is to call people fundamentalist, bigoted, gun-totin' boobs.

    The GOP strategy has been to make small-town and blue-collar people believe Democrats look at them that way. And now Obama proves the GOP was right all along.

    Brilliant.

    [ Parent ]

    Badger, you called it here -- (none / 0) (#277)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 10:30:50 PM EST
    that is exactly the problem.  Obama said what Republicans say but have more sense than to say on tape.  

    [ Parent ]
    ahaha (none / 0) (#82)
    by boredmpa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:21:40 PM EST
    My mother is a UCC minister in PA.

    I can't WAIT to hear her response to this...

    [ Parent ]

    Obama can kiss... (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by OxyCon on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:14:33 PM EST
    ...any chance he ever had of winning the general election goodbye.
    In fact, I'd advise Hillary to pick someone else for VP, because Obama will drag her down.

    You add this in with the flag pin, not placing his hand over his heart, Rev "God Damn the US of KKK A, "Typical White People", Michelle "I'm finally proud of America", and I think this is the straw that breaks Obama's back.

    He's no longer electable in the general.

    The Repubs can (and will) say all kinds of nasty things about Hillary. But one thing they can't call her is an America hating, elitist snob. And that doesn't play well with most Americans.

    [ Parent ]

    exactly! (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by Josey on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:33:51 PM EST
    "GD America!" won't stand a chance against a POW war hero.

    [ Parent ]
    exactly! (none / 0) (#106)
    by Josey on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:33:51 PM EST
    "GD America!" won't stand a chance against a POW war hero.

    [ Parent ]
    yep (none / 0) (#16)
    by kempis on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:53:47 PM EST
    I agree.

    [ Parent ]
    It is a good response (5.00 / 10) (#15)
    by Democratic Cat on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:53:34 PM EST
    But I don't think think people are going to ignore what he said. I believe the GOP, with an assist from the media, will use it to start building the meme that he's an elitist and out of touch with the common man. We're going to see pictures of Obama in bowling shoes from now until November.

    People like to feel that their Presidents understand them. Bill Clinton was mocked for feeling people's pain, but he did feel it and it helped make him electable despite the fact that he was usually the smartest guy in the room. (Only "usually" because sometimes, Hillary was in the room too.)

    [ Parent ]

    Great minds think alike ;-) (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by dianem on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:10:26 PM EST
    I just wrote the same thing in a comment. By the time the election comes around, Americans will see Obama as an arrogant, wealthy product of the Illinois patronage system. His church will be turned into a black supremacist outfit. His association with Rezko will be proof positive that he supports fatcats. His "bowling" moment will be seen as a publicity stunt meant to con the common man into thinking Obama thinks he is one of them. I wonder how the right is trying to work that into the campaign? I have a feeling that they will.

    [ Parent ]
    A little early (none / 0) (#153)
    by jen on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:51:30 PM EST
    He hasn't got it wrapped up yet. There's still a chance for Hillary to win. This will be smoothed over by Monday and either Bill, or someone else in Clinton's camp will (according to the media) out do this gaffe with one that will last into next week.


    [ Parent ]
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by nell on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:15:45 PM EST
    He was smart for getting in front of this quickly, but I don't this statement does anything to help him...it basically says Obama has always said Americans are angry at Washington. True enough. But has he always said that this anger has turned them into bitter gun-toting, racist, religious people? Of course not. I don't think his statement says much of anything at all, it is basically filler. In addition to what the statement says, he should have taken responsibility and noted that his words came out poorly.

    [ Parent ]
    It gives them an "out" (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by dianem on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:19:45 PM EST
    This will give the media an opportunity to report on Obama's clarification of his words at the same time as they report on the words themselves. If the media choose to spin this in his favor, then this gives them an "out".  I've already seen this reported by Reuters as "Clinton attacks Obama for...", which led into a long article with minimal negative coverage of Obama and a lot of negative coverage of Clinton.  

    [ Parent ]
    And he IS Washington, he's a Senator -- (none / 0) (#278)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 10:33:44 PM EST
    and he just can't keep playing that anti-D.C. game, as people get on to it.

    Either he is part of Washington, where he has gained experience at how the government is run -- or he's too new to Washington, too inexperienced yet, to know.

    I have wondered how long it would take, what it would take, for this anti-D.C. stuff to stop working for him -- at least the way he spins it, which can come back at him.  Now may be when it will do so.

    [ Parent ]

    What really is interesting (4.66 / 3) (#5)
    by phat on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:47:54 PM EST
    is that the reporter who apparently broke this almost didn't because she "didn't want to sink his campaign" or some such.

    What hasn't she reported? What hasn't been reported about this guy? If it's him and McCain trying to "out darling" each other I'm going to have to avoid all news until Nov.

    She's an Obaman and "citizen journalist" (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 06:54:55 PM EST
    so she said on CNN.  Has followed Obama all around Pennsylvania, has donated a lot to him, etc.  If she wanted to be an Obama delegate, though, I think she just got "purged."

    Btw, there are interesting questions that will be debated about taping at a private event from which journalists -- the regular kind -- were banned.

    [ Parent ]

    Well if she's donating to Obama (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by lilburro on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:17:27 PM EST
    she's not really a journalist.  They don't get to do that.  Which leads us to reasonable questions about the trustworthiness of bloggers who do not impose such rules on themselves (apparently)...what are the rules for this kind of thing?

    [ Parent ]
    did Gov. Rendell say (none / 0) (#115)
    by Josey on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:37:06 PM EST
    Obama's statement is racist?
    Obama supporters at The Orange are saying Rendell injected racism into it.
    ?????

    [ Parent ]
    I think Obama did. (none / 0) (#143)
    by nycstray on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:47:59 PM EST
    check out the first part of the text. It could be read that he's implying the good folks of PA that he so 'nicely' described might also be a bit racist. Read it and let me know what ya think. I read it a couple times and listened to the audio. Bothered me that folks thought it was funny . ..

    [ Parent ]
    Rendell said that some PA (none / 0) (#148)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:49:42 PM EST
    voters were racist.

    [ Parent ]
    Remember what your people (none / 0) (#151)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:51:12 PM EST
    did with Rendell's comment?  It was going on for days.  

    [ Parent ]
    Guns, Gods & Gays is what Democrats (none / 0) (#157)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:53:02 PM EST
    commonly refer to this as. Why is it a big deal now?

    [ Parent ]
    Really, now. (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by lansing quaker on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:58:21 PM EST
    Obama's comments were specifically tuned to voters in the next Democratic primary election.

    He was referring to Pennsylvanians.  Not the electorate as a whole.  Not in Republican/Democratic campaign methodology.

    He referred to Pennsylvanians and even threw in Ohio for good measure.  It's insinuating these people are voting for Hillary - not Republicans - for the aforementioned reasons.

    No shade in the rainbow can paint that pretty.  And I'm gay.  I like rainbows.

    But I'm also a Michigan voter.  One of those Obama doesn't want to "count," and also one from a very Catholic family, a family of hunters, and also a family of FDR-style Dems.

    Whoops.

    [ Parent ]

    As you're making things up (none / 0) (#179)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:04:51 PM EST
    I can't respond.

    [ Parent ]
    Really (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by Steve M on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 08:09:33 PM EST
    So you think the reference to politicians who "say anything to win elections" but don't actually change anything was completely unrelated to his campaign theme of claiming Hillary will "say anything and change nothing"?

    Your perceptiveness and keen ear are sure on display throughout this thread.

    [ Parent ]

    Same reason NYT didn't print (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by litigatormom on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:44:45 PM EST
    the domestic spying program story before the 2004 election -- it might have affected the election if voters found out what a lying scumbag their president and vice-president were.

    [ Parent ]
    Did she really (none / 0) (#78)
    by Lil on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 07:20:51 PM EST
    think this would be the thing to sink him? I'd be surprised but if it does, I hope it is now and not in the Fall.

    [ Parent ]