home

Jim Johnson Out As Obama VP Vetter

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 01:55:47 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Good move by the Obama camp. Obama's statement:

Jim did not want to distract in any way from the very important task of gathering information about my vice presidential nominee, so he has made a decision to step aside that I accept. We have a very good selection process underway, and I am confident that it will produce a number of highly qualified candidates for me to choose from in the weeks ahead. I remain grateful to Jim for his service and his efforts in this process."

Next time, let's be careful BEFORE we name folks like Johnson, who clearly epitomized everything Obama was said to be running against. Politics is phony theatre, but this was a bit too much.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Comments closed.

< Guantanamo Death Trials: 'Not Acceptable' | WMRM? >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Jim Johnson Out As Obama VP Vetter | 202 comments (202 topical)
    If the extended primary was useful (5.00 / 5) (#1)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 01:59:05 PM EST
    for anything, it was to prove to Obama and his people that letting issues fester is BAD. Take the short term pain when you can.

    He still (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:03:28 PM EST
    hasn't learned that lesson. He should have gotten rid of him once everything came out. I figure he waits until he sees what happens in the polls and then acts.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm using my power of internet telepathy (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:06:26 PM EST
    to force him to understand!

    [ Parent ]
    How is that working out for you? (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by BarnBabe on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:08:53 PM EST
    Did you try it in the primary?

    [ Parent ]
    Isn't that what yammering on the internet (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:11:13 PM EST
    is for?

    [ Parent ]
    No, but oddly I just online-sent andgarden a pizza (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:13:40 PM EST
    Weird!

    [ Parent ]
    It seems to be Johnson should never have (5.00 / 7) (#19)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:08:24 PM EST
    been on that committe in the first place.  If obama is that ill-informed about something like this, how are we supposed to trust him in the WH.

    [ Parent ]
    Perhaps O's Campaign (5.00 / 6) (#51)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:17:46 PM EST
    thought they'd continue to get a pass from media on most things, including this.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, funny how the media darling (5.00 / 5) (#78)
    by madamab on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:30:03 PM EST
    is suddenly getting just a tiny bit of pushback, and he caves. Funny how the least bit of scrutiny seems to show glaring problems with his vaunted "judgment."

    How is he going to handle the inevitable August swiftboating campaign, I wonder, should he nominated at the Convention?

    [ Parent ]

    obama declares....I was for Jim Johnson (5.00 / 6) (#87)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:34:32 PM EST
    before I was against him....lol

    [ Parent ]
    I'm trying (5.00 / 3) (#127)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:55:17 PM EST
    to think when was the last time we had a candidate who filled up the bus so quickly? Not Kerry, not Gore, not Clinton. Dukakis perhaps? Mondale? I know Carter ended up throwing tons of people under the bus.

    [ Parent ]
    Let's see ... (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by brodie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:16:36 PM EST
    Gore:  threw his pollsters Penn/Schoen under bus, fall 99.  Fired his campaign director and others, May 00.  Didn't fire VP vetter Warren Christopher (loser also of Recount infamy) when he chose Joe Lieberman.

    Kerry:  fired camp mgr in fall 03.  Failed to throw self under bus when he failed to go with his gut instinct on the Veep pick.

    Bill:  pretty loyal, even to semi-disloyal fair-weather aides like Geo Stephanopolous.  Demoted/fired press sec'y Dee Dee Myers.  And did toss first two AG picks under bus, over the slightest nanny-SS tax reasons.  Ditto for thrown under bus CR Division nominee Lana Guinier.

    Hill: should have thrown Mark Penn under bus far earlier. Ditto for inept Patti Doyle Solis.

    [ Parent ]

    Kerry (5.00 / 3) (#167)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:24:22 PM EST
    wasn't the nominee when he fired his campaign manager.

    Although you disagree with the choice of Lieberman as VP there was no reason to fire Christopher over that one. It was only after the Gore lost that people realized Lieberman wasn't helpful.

    I remember Clinton doing that AFTER he was in office. I'm pretty much talking about a nominee who had to throw so many people under the bush. The only example that looks close is Gore firing his campaign team in May 00

    Already Obama's thrown Grandma, Wright, Pleger, Johnson and we haven't even made it to the convention. At the rate he's going, he'll be throwing Michelle and his daughters under the bus before the Nov. election.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm not sure what sort of principled point (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by brodie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:34:09 PM EST
    you want to make if it's essentially okay to toss 'em under the bus so long as it's not done when the pol is campaigning as the nominee.  By that definition, and since O has only been the nominee for a week now, we must not count Wright and Pfleger and Granny, can we?

    Oh, and yes, as a matter of fact, I thought the Lieberman selection was a disaster.  Not so much in a 20-20 easy hindsight sense, but in a the way Gore so clearly threw Pres Clinton under the bus by selecting Mr Sanctimony.

    [ Parent ]

    Hmm (5.00 / 0) (#188)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:43:34 PM EST
    Okay, if you just want to list the things candidates did then that's okay with me. Still Obama seems to be way ahead of the game already.

    What do you think of Obama throwing clinton under the bus then? Or of his sactimonious attitude. Truly, Obama is the closest thing to Lieberman in a lot of ways than any other candidate.

    [ Parent ]

    Brodie...I either didn't know or just forgot (5.00 / 2) (#186)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:42:19 PM EST
    about the DeeDee Meyers incident.  This could account for her husband's scandalous current Vanity Fair article...bogus b.s., with no real sources.  Man, these people are something else.

    [ Parent ]
    Well (5.00 / 3) (#162)
    by Chisoxy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:22:33 PM EST
    that has to happen when you choose to run as St. Obama of Chicago

    [ Parent ]
    In politics, (5.00 / 0) (#187)
    by pie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:43:18 PM EST
    even the vetters need vetting, I guess.

    Also, he was only a volunteer!  He wasn't getting paid by the campaign!

    Geez, you guys.  ;)

    [ Parent ]

    Possibly obama's ticket on the Free Pass (5.00 / 5) (#90)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:35:22 PM EST
    Express has been punched...no more free rides.  

    [ Parent ]
    I think that is a myth (1.33 / 3) (#164)
    by Jgarza on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:23:40 PM EST
    He has never gotten a free pass.  The only media coverage that showed him getting more positive press was immediately following Iowa.  

    [ Parent ]
    Sorry - no (5.00 / 5) (#182)
    by cmugirl on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:39:26 PM EST
    "Voters have little doubt as to who is benefitting from the media coverage this year--Barack Obama. Fifty-four percent (54%) say Obama has gotten the best coverage so far. Twenty-two percent (22%) say McCain has received the most favorable coverage while 14% say that Hillary got the best treatment.

    At the other extreme, 43% say Clinton received the worst treatment from the media. Twenty-seven percent (27%) say the media was roughest on McCain and only 15% thought the media coverage was most unfair to Obama. "

    LINK

    [ Parent ]

    Who Vill Vett de Vetters? (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:10:31 PM EST
    Vim Van de Vetters vom Den Haag.

    I'm surprised he let him go actually. Seemed a bit non controvetial, but mordantly funny.

    [ Parent ]

    LOL (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by bjorn on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:19:03 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Although I couldn't find anything deeming (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:02:34 PM EST
    Mr. Johnson as registered federal lobbyist. But, yes, a smart move.

    But why is Obama so intent on not seeing the obvious choice of Clinton?

    Not only that (5.00 / 8) (#6)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:04:25 PM EST
    but I think his campaign has had a concerted effort to discredit her.  

    [ Parent ]
    Not conducive to healing, imo. (5.00 / 5) (#37)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:12:45 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Biding his time (5.00 / 4) (#69)
    by Democratic Cat on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:26:31 PM EST
    In my opinion, he does not want to share a ticket with Hillary, but knows he may not be able to win without her. So for right now he's looking elsewhere and not mentioning Clinton as VP in any serious way, and will poll to figure out how many of Clinton's supporters seem to be willing to support him anyway even if she is not on the ticket. If he doesn't get enough of them, he'll name Clinton later, and say "we looked high and low, and couldn't find a more qualified person." If he does get enough of her supporters to come on board, then he'll name someone else.

    This is, of course, pure speculation.

    [ Parent ]

    It's right on (5.00 / 4) (#105)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:47:22 PM EST
    "Let's see if we can ride it out" is the standard M.O. of his campaign.

    [ Parent ]
    This should have been (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:03:25 PM EST
     his showcasing of putting together a coalition.  Now they showed their colors.  

    So much (5.00 / 7) (#5)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:04:20 PM EST
    for New Politics and Change, Change, Change.

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

    As usual (5.00 / 12) (#7)
    by Steve M on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:04:26 PM EST
    Brilliant move by Obama to keep him on board, even more brilliant move to get rid of him.  The guy just keeps showing his mastery of the process.

    Surely (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:05:35 PM EST
    you are snarking? LOL.

    Yep, he ignores it until it becomes a crescendo then under the bus he goes!

    [ Parent ]

    Rumor has it (5.00 / 16) (#18)
    by standingup on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:08:07 PM EST
    Johnson would have been under the bus yesterday but they had to wait for the arrival of a new fleet.  

    [ Parent ]
    ROTFLMAO! (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:10:33 PM EST
    Yep, it's looking like he might need that fleet. The GOP is forcing the media to "vet" him.

    [ Parent ]
    Who first Under the Bused? (5.00 / 8) (#49)
    by BarnBabe on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:17:11 PM EST
    There are so many thrown under it that people all over should be walking around with tire marks down their back. Picture that around DC. People walking down the street and you hear them say, 'Oh Look, they got Herb too.'

    [ Parent ]
    ala Night Of The Living Dead??? (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:41:27 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    LOL (5.00 / 6) (#132)
    by feet on earth on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:59:43 PM EST
    Someone should make t-shirts with tire mark prints for Hillary's delegates at the conventions. That be fun.

    [ Parent ]
    Guess they finally found a way (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:24:15 PM EST
    to use those buses they sent to New Orleans to evacuate the city.

    [ Parent ]
    Heh (5.00 / 11) (#42)
    by Steve M on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:13:42 PM EST
    I am just remembering all the awesome rationalizations we got in yesterday's thread.  I think my favorite argument was "any qualified person you could possibly pick would have problems like this!"

    One of the most amusing things in politics is when you defend your candidate's position to the death, and then the next day they change their mind and throw you under the bus, so to speak.

    I don't know what it is about the Obama supporters.  It's like finding a rare jewel when one of them says "yeah, this sort of bothers me" or "gee, Obama could have given a better statement."  Some ability for self-criticism is nice.

    [ Parent ]

    Self-awareness is old politics. (5.00 / 5) (#46)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:16:07 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Yes, and truthiness is back in vogue (5.00 / 5) (#62)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:24:30 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Usually (5.00 / 8) (#55)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:19:11 PM EST
    they just attack you as if we just made this stuff up out of whole cloth. I got attacked by an Obama supporter yesterday by daring to point out that Obama's record on GLBT stuff wasn't that hot and cited McClurkin.

    Somehow that was just another attempt at 'character assassination by way of guilt by association' and....something.

    It astounds me that rather than actually bothering to look into things and realising that there might be something rotten in Hyde Park, it's just easier to screed about how it's Not True.

    Does anyone remember that short period of time when Obama was claiming his judgement was better'n anyone else's because he was Obama? I do expect to see those sound bites/standing behind signs that said "Good Judgement" showing up real soon.

    [ Parent ]

    And really Clinton (5.00 / 9) (#64)
    by LoisInCo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:24:39 PM EST
    could have gone crazy on all the stuff. But she didn't much. She was a very kind opponent in my opinion. (To kind.)

    [ Parent ]
    Indeed (5.00 / 7) (#83)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:32:42 PM EST
    The sad thing is the Obama supporters really have no idea how gently she treated him by comparison to what the Republicans can and will. This is just the starting salvos, IMHO.

    I keep hearing how now that he's our nominee we can't say anything bad about him and it's got to be all McCain-bashing all the time. Happily I am no longer part of that 'we' and will throw rocks where I see fit.

    [ Parent ]

    oh yes indeedy, Hillary is going to be (5.00 / 5) (#100)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:43:38 PM EST
    looking pretty good to them soon....and hopefully, to the SD's and the a$$hats of the DNC.

    [ Parent ]
    The one (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:01:39 PM EST
    they all seem to use is calling you a liar. Nothing makes me madder than that.

    [ Parent ]
    Or, "do you have a link for that!!??" (5.00 / 6) (#156)
    by ineedalife on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:19:05 PM EST
    As if every politically aware person wasn't jabbering about the topic for days just a few weeks ago.

    They must teach these tactics to disarm threads at Obama camps. You see the same tactics used everywhere, over and over.

    It is like a lawyer trying to get something in the record, even when they know it is not true. As if naive people are going to read TalkLeft archives and stumble across the thread and be bamboozled.

    [ Parent ]

    I know (5.00 / 4) (#134)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:00:16 PM EST
    that's what makes this kind of stuff doubly funny. It reminds me of the bush supporters who hung on his every word and no matter how many "conservative" principles he killed off it was simply pronounced as "wonderful"!

    [ Parent ]
    Karen Hughes (5.00 / 4) (#148)
    by magisterludi on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:06:44 PM EST
    used to say " The President, in his wisdom,...", referring to W. The crown jewel of cringe-worthiness.

    [ Parent ]
    heh (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:06:00 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    That was good. (5.00 / 5) (#21)
    by Marco21 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:09:21 PM EST
    I fear more Obama campaign hilarity over the next few months.

    [ Parent ]
    Not brilliant, conniving... (5.00 / 7) (#35)
    by stefystef on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:12:15 PM EST
    Johnson wouldn't be out of this job if the press didn't make such a big thing about him.

    Obama has again showed his "tell"... he will readily get rid of anyone who might bring attention to the weaknesses in his campaign and himself.  

    So that's what the Republicans should do... don't attack Obama directly, attack all around him.  Dig up the dirt on Axelrod and Co., bring out all the dirty Chicago politics around Obama.  Dig up all the crap on the politicians who dumped the Clintons to get on the Obama Magical Bus Tour and lets see how people Barry starts cutting off.

    [ Parent ]

    when will obama say "enough" (5.00 / 5) (#75)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:29:08 PM EST
    whatever one says about Penn, Clinton didnt throw him under the bus.  At least not until Penn failed to keep his two jobs separate.

    Of course obama can never say "enough".  Because No one has done more that obama to build guilt by association memes in politics.

    An expectation of purity now constricts  his every move.

    [ Parent ]

    Nice way to help the enemy (3.00 / 2) (#193)
    by tribe643 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:55:22 PM EST
    By giving advice to Republicans on how they could possibly attack our nominee. I understand fair criticism, but that comment almost seemed to imply a means of sabotaging Obama's campaign to the benefit of McCain.

    [ Parent ]
    Do you think (5.00 / 3) (#200)
    by cmugirl on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 04:02:14 PM EST
    the Republicans won't think of it unless a commenter posts it on a blog somewhere?

    [ Parent ]
    Not necessarily (1.00 / 1) (#204)
    by tribe643 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 04:07:04 PM EST
    But if this type of attitude reeks face on various other blogs with similar types of comments, I have no doubt it will, at least on some occasions, get to Republican staffers.

    They can think of strategies to defeat our nominee all they want. We shouldn't be in the habit of giving them a leg up in that process.

    [ Parent ]

    we aint (5.00 / 1) (#206)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 04:08:18 PM EST
    unless we are being read religiously.

    [ Parent ]
    that's what Hannity is doing right now (none / 0) (#56)
    by Josey on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:20:35 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    whatever that bloke does is fine by me (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:13:09 PM EST
    he's fantastic. Why, if he delivered a speech at the Oxford Union they'd hoist him upon their shoulder and shout out in glee:

    "For he's a jolly good fellow....which nobody can deny."

    [ Parent ]

    Why, just this morning on local NPR (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:16:04 PM EST
    radio the "political reporter," a woman of probably 70 and totally an Obamaite, reported 52% of Europeans would prefer Obama as U.S. President.  

    [ Parent ]
    Only 52%? (5.00 / 3) (#70)
    by davnee on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:26:52 PM EST
    That's pretty pathetic for Obama actually.  The McSame meme apparently doesn't even win you a landslide across the pond!

    [ Parent ]
    Well, you know (5.00 / 11) (#77)
    by Steve M on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:29:58 PM EST
    Appalachia now extends into the Pyrenees.

    [ Parent ]
    But, remember, no Obama rallies (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:30:35 PM EST
    in Europe yet, to my knowledge.

    [ Parent ]
    It's also because (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:34:25 PM EST
    they've been pretty much shielded from any of the negatives (just like anyone who goes to the pro-Obama blogs). When I've given my European friends actual examples of Why I Will Not Vote For Him, they quickly change their minds.

    [ Parent ]
    A French friend asked me in April who I (none / 0) (#91)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:35:58 PM EST
    favored.  When I sd. Clinton, he immed. sd. she lied about Tuzla.  He follows U.S. policics quite closely, but is strongly in favor of Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    Never trust the French with politics (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by stefystef on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:50:48 PM EST
    They are really having a great time with Skarkozy, aren't they?

    [ Parent ]
    Definitely, buyer's remorse. (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by themomcat on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:52:45 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    which Sarkozy? (none / 0) (#205)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 04:07:30 PM EST
    mememememememe.

    [ Parent ]
    BTD (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:04:34 PM EST
    Obama hasn't been careful about who he picks. This kind of stuff is going to continue to happen throughout the campaign. Didn't he reinstate Goolsby?

    Threw another one under the bus (5.00 / 7) (#9)
    by stefystef on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:05:00 PM EST
    I knew this was going to happen.

    Obama will push off anyone ANYONE who could be a slight threat to him and his ambitions.

    And they use to put Hillary down everyday and this Obama gets to pretend like he doesn't know the people around him?

    As time goes by, I have less faith in this self-centered, narcissistic politician from the Chicago school of "back-door politics".

    The guy resigned (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by CST on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:07:27 PM EST
    I think it's pretty clear Obama didn't throw him under the bus.  Obama defended him and then he stepped down.

    [ Parent ]
    Are you really that naive? (5.00 / 8) (#26)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:10:52 PM EST
    He was asked to step down so Obama wouldn't have to sully himself by 'firing' someone he claimed wasn't getting paid in the first place. One of the oldest tricks in the book. I'm surprised Johnson didn't say he was leaving to "spend time with his wife and kids".

    [ Parent ]
    Whatever (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by CST on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:13:19 PM EST
    There is a big difference between that and what happened with the reverends etc... that he actually threw under the bus.

    No I am not naive thank you, obviously it was a joint decision but they did it in a way that was clearly NOT throwing under the bus.

    [ Parent ]

    More like CYA (5.00 / 10) (#57)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:21:14 PM EST
    Obama was stammering and spluttering yesterday about how he couldn't vet the vetters etc. and defending Johnson. Now, he's gone. I guess our definition of what that bus is differs greatly.

    [ Parent ]
    the pattern is the same (5.00 / 5) (#76)
    by Josey on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:29:27 PM EST
    An Obama associate is exposed. Obama initially ignores the glaring landmines and defends him/her.
    When it's obvious associates damning America, calling Hillary a monster, obtaining special deals from FHA, etc - are problematic, Obama finally sees the light.
    Obviously, Obama's judgment is reliant on polls and focus groups.


    [ Parent ]
    resigned? (5.00 / 8) (#79)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:30:12 PM EST
    or quietly asked to resign while the other hand kills with kindness?

    The latter is a standard "old" politics tactic.

    [ Parent ]

    hmm...you really think that there was (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by nulee on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:11:42 PM EST
    no chat with Axelrod? I highly doubt it.

    [ Parent ]
    Good one. Probably wanted to spend (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:17:02 PM EST
    more time w/his family.

    [ Parent ]
    Heh (5.00 / 9) (#59)
    by Steve M on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:22:24 PM EST
    More like spending more time with Obama's grandmother.

    [ Parent ]
    Priceless (5.00 / 2) (#94)
    by standingup on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:37:07 PM EST
    I am bookmarking this one for future reference!  

    [ Parent ]
    Hasn't she been re-habbed? The women (none / 0) (#63)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:24:31 PM EST
    in Obama's life, you know.

    [ Parent ]
    You can still see the tire tracks (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by Steve M on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:26:03 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I wish she would speak up. The Kenyan (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:26:58 PM EST
    relatives are ecstatic.  

    [ Parent ]
    LOL! (none / 0) (#73)
    by madamab on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:27:41 PM EST
    You are killing me today, Steve M! :-)

    [ Parent ]
    LOL. Just like how Rummy resigned. (5.00 / 4) (#86)
    by rooge04 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:34:31 PM EST
    Just how every politician in the history of America has "resigned." Elliot Spitzer resigned too.  LOL.

    [ Parent ]
    C'on CST (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by Andy08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:59:44 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Oh well (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by CST on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:06:54 PM EST
    Guess I struck out on that one.  I definitely have a different idea of "under the bus"  although I am still waiting for Dick Cheney to literally throw someone under a bus and give the whole analogy new meaning.


    [ Parent ]
    He "stepped" down? (5.00 / 0) (#191)
    by stefystef on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:51:52 PM EST
    Like Rumsfeld and Powell "stepped" down?

    Awwwww, the wonderful world of the naive.

    [ Parent ]

    Way to be condescending (5.00 / 2) (#207)
    by CST on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 04:10:03 PM EST
    If you actually bothered to read my other posts you would see that I clarified that - but yes, stepping down (even if he was asked to) is a big difference from being "rejected and renounced".

    But yea, I MUST be "naive" for having a difference of opinion on what being thrown under the bus means.  At least I don't refer to you as "out of touch".

    [ Parent ]

    Obama (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by cmugirl on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:10:58 PM EST
    once again shows superior judgment - Gee, all I want is a President who's smart enough to know that his associations are fair game, but it looks like we won't have that for at least another 4 years now.

    "The wheels on the bus go round and round.  Round and round. Round and round.  The wheels on the bus go round and round, all through the town."

    [ Parent ]

    It has probably been done already... (none / 0) (#166)
    by ineedalife on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:24:17 PM EST
    and I am too out of it to know. But a YouTube to the tune of "Another One Bites the Dust" by Queen entitled "Another One Under the Bus" would be hilarious.

    [ Parent ]
    One Thing For Sure (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by talex on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:11:18 PM EST
    Loyalty, as with the Bushies, will not be a major theme with Obama should he win. The only one he is loyal to is himself.

    His priorities are: Self, Self, God, Self, Country

    [ Parent ]

    I disagree. (5.00 / 6) (#39)
    by LoisInCo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:13:09 PM EST
    It is Self, Self, God, Self, and Michelle.

    [ Parent ]
    god? (5.00 / 3) (#138)
    by denise on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:01:40 PM EST
    I think not. In religion as in everything else, it's all for show.

    [ Parent ]
    Now If Caroline Kennedy (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by talex on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:05:16 PM EST
    would resign all would be good. For we all know that Caroline would not even consider considering Hillary as VP. And if a vetter cannot vett without preconceived prejudices then they are not a vetter at all, they are just an unpaid employee (for now) following the bosses orders.

    As a sidebar to this issue:

    I wonder who Obama has his mortgage with? Countrywide? Nah!

    Maybe someone should look into that - it is public record. I mean Obama wouldn't have got a sweetheart mortgage through a referral from Johnson like he got a sweetheart deal on the price of property from Rezko would he? Nah!

    Are you basing this on the fact (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by bjorn on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:07:14 PM EST
    that Kennedy endorsed Obama?  I don't think she has it in for the Clintons or anything.  

    [ Parent ]
    Caroline Kennedy has (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by brodie on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:16:09 PM EST
    been one of his better vetter picks, even though she didn't back my candidate, and indeed it doesn't mean she despises Hillary.  She managed by dint of her background and political parentage to avoid some of the backlash that went against, say, Oprah, from the HRC wing.

    Also, it's going to be very hard after a very long primary season to come up with vetters who not only have a "clean" resume but who are also "clean" wrt not having favored one candidate over the other.  

    The hyperventilating about his vetters, with the mischievous McCain camp leading the charge and curious McC backers on certain Dem boards rallying to this trivial cause, is really getting ridiculous.

    [ Parent ]

    I dunno (5.00 / 9) (#93)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:36:15 PM EST
    Kennedy said the reason she endorsed Obama was because her children told her to (just like McCaskill and several others). That hardly sells me. Perhaps her children would be more qualified to decide his vp pick then.

    [ Parent ]
    I actually (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by LoisInCo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:44:31 PM EST
    thought her initial article was effective. The problem became when instead of allowing her children's reaction to Obama be the star, she started stumping for him and it became not an emotional reaction to him, but a political device. That blunted alot of the reaction to it in my opinion.

    [ Parent ]
    Is a better vetter like a nutter butter? :) (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:48:16 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I thought she was an odd choice... (5.00 / 2) (#110)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:48:17 PM EST
    ... since she has essentially no relevant experience. But I don't really consider her unfairly biased. And in any event, the vetters will give Hillary a clean bill of health if that's what Obama wants them to do. It's really the other candidates where a lot of work needs to be done.

    [ Parent ]
    I think she is mostly filling in (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:50:34 PM EST
    for Teddy, probably as a conduit to him.

    [ Parent ]
    He did not deliver the yesterday statement (5.00 / 6) (#13)
    by BarnBabe on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:06:25 PM EST
    in good form also. He hemmed and hawd rather than just answering the question. Maybe he did not expect the question. But we can't vet the questioner either because they had the facts on their side.

    My first thought yesterday was I wonder if Obama got his loan through him. That is not what you want people even forming in their mind. Yeah, nipped it in the bud. Might not be the end of it but maybe it is.  I suspect Obama is going to have a lot of these "Surprises". HE is finally being vetted.

    When the VP trio was announced (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by esmense on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:07:27 PM EST
    I figured he (Johnson) was going to represent Wall Street's interest in the proceedings. I don't think the campaign will have any trouble finding someone else to do that job.

    (Kennedy is a nice celebrity pick who can probably be counted on represent the interests of Northeaster liberals.)

    And Uncle Ted (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by BarnBabe on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:09:32 PM EST
    N/T

    [ Parent ]
    It means (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by CST on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:11:12 PM EST
    He is not speaking for Talk Left since Jeralyn runs the site not BTD.
    Obama says (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by magisterludi on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:11:16 PM EST
    he won't vet the vetters. So, if true, we'll see how often "stuff happens" through out the campaign? Interesting talking point,I'll give him that, especially in light of Wright and Pfleger.

    Get ready for the Eric Holder (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by shannon on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:12:03 PM EST
    attack to come out. The republicans have been waiting to unleash their case against him, too, to his involvement in the Marc Rich pardon.

    What really troubles me is that the controversies surrounding both of these guys, Johnson and Holder, weren't exactly secrets. It should have been expected that the republicans would make issues out of them.

    iOh, it's already out there (5.00 / 4) (#44)
    by janarchy on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:15:50 PM EST
    Hannity & Co. were having a field day with it last night: Johnson and Holder plus the whole Pfleger/Wright thing. It's actually laughable in a very twisted way.

    [ Parent ]
    And so it begins (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by Lil on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:12:31 PM EST


    I think the vetting is superficial (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by sociallybanned on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:18:22 PM EST
    Really!  I think Obama and his peeps already have made up their mind.  Just like the most recent article that they are seeking retired military.  

    I think Obama wants a veep that can get him out of his empty promise to withdraw by bringing on a veep of military.

    Plus, someone who can debunk McCain, for obvious reasons (McCain -POW).

    Plus, it's that 3 am call, that puts fear into a lot of ppls eyes

    surely that can't be the same bus, (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by cpinva on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:18:38 PM EST
    can it? by now, there have to be at least two of them, one couldn't possibly hold everyone.

    and the implosion continues. it's like watching a train wreck slowly come to a grinding halt, as it lurches towards the convention. it's a good thing for the dems they still have clinton in the wings, ready to pick up the pieces of the self-destructed obama campaign.

    sheesh, who thought this guy was ready for prime time?

    Who thought this guy (5.00 / 4) (#58)
    by madamab on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:22:06 PM EST
    was ready for prime time?

    Kerry, Kennedy, Daschle and Brazile.

    When is their bus coming?

    [ Parent ]

    Implosion? (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by SpinDoctor on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:24:54 PM EST
    How about a reality check, courtesy of Mark Kleiman:

    In the two Presidential tracking polls, Obama has gone from roughly even to +7 (Gallup) and +8 (Rasmussen) since clinching the nomination a week ago.

    That's a bigger lead than either candidate had at any stage of the 2004 race.

    When Rasmussen pushes the "leaners," Obama's lead shrinks a point to +7, but he hits the 50% mark. Jimmy Carter got 50.6% in 1976. The two previous Democrats to crack 50% were LBJ in 1964 and FDR in 1944.

    [ Parent ]

    Today (5.00 / 5) (#82)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:32:24 PM EST
    It is Obama +5 (Ras) or +6 (Gallup). Is the bounce over?

    Reality check, this is going to be a close election.

    [ Parent ]

    Never said otherwise (5.00 / 2) (#92)
    by SpinDoctor on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:36:06 PM EST
    However, commenters suggesting his campaign is imploding while he has a national lead over McCain is absurd.  You might also be intrested in the most recent Michigan polling Armando where Obama has surpassed McCain and now is up by 3% according to Rasmussen.  

    As for the bounce, I am not sure we have seen the full effect and likely will not until the end of this week.

    [ Parent ]

    many obama supporters promised a blow out. (5.00 / 7) (#119)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:52:39 PM EST
    I never believed 'em for a minute.

    [ Parent ]
    National Polls? (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by Emma on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:34:38 PM EST
    I assume those are national polls?  I don't know that they mean much.  It's electoral votes that matter.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama should be (5.00 / 4) (#142)
    by Andy08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:03:53 PM EST
    20 pts ahead ...This election should be a slam dunk for Dems. Bush approval ratiings are at 20%; the economy is a disaster (gas anyone?) and the war. 2008 should have been/be nothing like 2004.  

    That is at striking distance of a statistical error today is alarming.
    It will only get tighter in the Fall.

    [ Parent ]

    Is this the general election bus yet? (none / 0) (#176)
    by ineedalife on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:33:32 PM EST
    Maybe you have to wait until after the convention to start another bus up. Maybe the FEC will have a ruling on wether Obama can start on a second bus as the presumptive nominee. Too bad he didn't take public financing. I hear FEMA has a whole fleet of Katrina buses he can use.

    [ Parent ]
    ineedalife....obama has commissioned (5.00 / 3) (#183)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:39:40 PM EST
    the new "Concord Bus".  You can fit millions under it...one bus fits all.

    [ Parent ]
    You know how the umpire throws the (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:22:53 PM EST
    manager out in MLB?  And then the manager sits in his office and manages the game from there?  

    A non-issue that results in a positive (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:25:51 PM EST
    This was much ado about nothing but I wasn't too keen on Johnson anyway so I'm glad to see him go.  

    And (5.00 / 10) (#74)
    by Steve M on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:28:47 PM EST
    let's go check out what flyerhawk was posting at the time:

    This is nothing more than gotcha politics.

    Jim Johnson is a Democratic operative who will give Obama the Party perspective on any potential choices.  That's it.

    It would be kind of noteworthy if one of you would ever express a negative opinion of something Obama does BEFORE he gives you permission to call it a mistake.

    [ Parent ]

    Honestly man, we already know (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Salo on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:50:19 PM EST
    wtf happened to the Dems.  

    He who isn't against me is with me!--that should be our motto.

    not this balderdash about parroting the party leader's every whim.

    [ Parent ]

    I have no idea (5.00 / 3) (#118)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:52:33 PM EST
    why you think these 2 points are inconsistent.

    I thought it was a ridiculous issue.  I think it is a ridiculous issue today.  

    I thought Johnson was your typical party operative yesterday.  I think Johnson is a typical party operative today.  

    I realize that you just poking sticks at Obama supporters but this dog won't hunt.

    [ Parent ]

    Just think (5.00 / 4) (#140)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:01:59 PM EST
    If you'd have said "I'd be glad to see him go," yesterday,

    [ Parent ]
    Flyerhawk, Senator Obama only exists (5.00 / 6) (#150)
    by bslev22 on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 03:08:09 PM EST
    as a viable candidate if he does more than hire typical party operatives who play footsie or are affiliated with companies that Obama publicly criticizes on the stump.  When you are the change candidate, when you are unlike the other folks, indeed when you place yourself on a pedestal of being something new, you must accept the good and bad implications of such a posture.  The result is that Senator Obama, and Senator McCain too, are both vulnerable to the hypocrisy charge in light of the respective positions they have taken in the campaign.

    This is a bad thing to happen to Senator Obama.  He can't keep getting rid of folks he trusted.

    [ Parent ]

    Say one thing, do another. (5.00 / 3) (#68)
    by This from a broad on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 02:26:17 PM EST
    "folks like Johnson, who clearly