Obama -- hypocrite of the first order
Yeah, I know, "understatement of the new century," but John Dickerson over at Slate paints a picture that a lot of Obama-bots are going to be seething over. None are yet, as I just checked the three major moonbat sites (Kos, DU, and the Huff-Po), and they apparently missed this one today. Trust me, when they wake up from their fog, they'll not be happy with Mr. Dickerson.
HT to Captain Ed:
At the next train stop, I'm going to stand behind Senator Obama when he speaks. When he's decrying the trivial distractions in politics, I think he may be crossing his fingers behind his back.
As the Senator's campaign train wound from one speech where he denounced tit-for-tat politics to the next speech where he denounced tit-for-tat politics, his campaign hosted a conference call to engage in the practice the candidate was busy denouncing. I suppose it would have been an even greater act of chutzpah for the Obama campaign to host the conference call while Sen. Obama was denouncing that kind of behavior, but not much more of one.
Obama campaign aides scheduled the call to talk about Hillary Clinton's fantastical story about her breakneck race to shelter under sniper fire during a visit to Bosnia. You might think this would be the last story the Obama campaign would be pushing, because in Wednesday's debate the Senator mistakenly suggested his campaign had only discussed the issue because reporters had brought it up, not because they were trying to take advantage of Clinton's extended work of fiction. To push the story again now would make Obama look even more insincere about that claim.
In the same debate, Obama also suggested the story was pretty much off limits. When asked about Clinton's Bosnia problem he said this: "I think Senator Clinton deserves, you know, the right to make some errors once in a while…I think what's important is to make sure that we don't get so obsessed with gaffes that we lose sight of the fact that this is a defining moment in our history. ..for us to be obsessed with this -- these kinds of errors I think is a mistake. And that's not what our campaign has been about." ...
While the candidate was denouncing the distractions, his aides were promoting them. Three veterans of the Bosnia conflict joined for a conference call to explain just how crucial this particular distraction was, and why we should ignore Senator Obama's guidance and get obsessed with this issue.
Major General Walter Stewart explained that because Clinton had fabricated on the issue of sniper fire, Clinton would not be able to perform the traditional ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier who, he averred, was undoubtedly killed by sniper fire. "She will lack the moral authority to lay the wreath on Memorial Day," he said. She would also be unable to honor the veterans remembered on the Vietnam memorial because many of them had also been killed by sniper fire. Captain Aaron Clevenstine offered a variation on this theme: "As someone who trained snipers, I take offense to the notion that she was under sniper fire." Michael Kotyk, a retired veteran of the Navy broadened the significance of Clinton's yarn: "We've had 8 years of dishonor. We need honor. If you're going to tell stories then you're not displaying honor."
Anyone else want to ask Senator Obama if he's qualified to run the nation if he's not aware his aides are busy engaging in the same thing he's condemning? What's sad about this is that we expected to see this. This neophyte just doesn't have a clue, and if all he's going to do is continue to whine about how he's being treated, he's going to seriously turn off a whole host of voters.
Voters don't like whiners. They want leaders. No one heard President Bush whine about squat in his eight years. He didn't whine about how he was viscerally attacked by the media and the Democrats. He didn't whine when Iraq wasn't going the way he'd intended. He didn't whine about the economic downturn. So, why is Obama whining, and doing so over questions that are seen as legitimate int he eyes of voters?
It's because he, like Hillary, is a baby at heart. He can't handle the heat and scrutiny that will be handed to him over the course of the next seven months. This kid's got nothing to offer this nation except condemnation, cluelessness, and a crass attitude. What a rookie. This is the big leagues. Man up and act responsibly. You can question Senator Clinton on her missteps, but God forbid anyone questions him? Give me a break. If I had the time and money, I'd heckle him at every campaign stop on those issues, and I'd do it until I got under his skin enough to make him blow his top.
THESE are legitimate questions. If he doesn't think so, then maybe he should save the superdelegates the hassle and bow out now.
Publius II
HT to Captain Ed:
At the next train stop, I'm going to stand behind Senator Obama when he speaks. When he's decrying the trivial distractions in politics, I think he may be crossing his fingers behind his back.
As the Senator's campaign train wound from one speech where he denounced tit-for-tat politics to the next speech where he denounced tit-for-tat politics, his campaign hosted a conference call to engage in the practice the candidate was busy denouncing. I suppose it would have been an even greater act of chutzpah for the Obama campaign to host the conference call while Sen. Obama was denouncing that kind of behavior, but not much more of one.
Obama campaign aides scheduled the call to talk about Hillary Clinton's fantastical story about her breakneck race to shelter under sniper fire during a visit to Bosnia. You might think this would be the last story the Obama campaign would be pushing, because in Wednesday's debate the Senator mistakenly suggested his campaign had only discussed the issue because reporters had brought it up, not because they were trying to take advantage of Clinton's extended work of fiction. To push the story again now would make Obama look even more insincere about that claim.
In the same debate, Obama also suggested the story was pretty much off limits. When asked about Clinton's Bosnia problem he said this: "I think Senator Clinton deserves, you know, the right to make some errors once in a while…I think what's important is to make sure that we don't get so obsessed with gaffes that we lose sight of the fact that this is a defining moment in our history. ..for us to be obsessed with this -- these kinds of errors I think is a mistake. And that's not what our campaign has been about." ...
While the candidate was denouncing the distractions, his aides were promoting them. Three veterans of the Bosnia conflict joined for a conference call to explain just how crucial this particular distraction was, and why we should ignore Senator Obama's guidance and get obsessed with this issue.
Major General Walter Stewart explained that because Clinton had fabricated on the issue of sniper fire, Clinton would not be able to perform the traditional ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier who, he averred, was undoubtedly killed by sniper fire. "She will lack the moral authority to lay the wreath on Memorial Day," he said. She would also be unable to honor the veterans remembered on the Vietnam memorial because many of them had also been killed by sniper fire. Captain Aaron Clevenstine offered a variation on this theme: "As someone who trained snipers, I take offense to the notion that she was under sniper fire." Michael Kotyk, a retired veteran of the Navy broadened the significance of Clinton's yarn: "We've had 8 years of dishonor. We need honor. If you're going to tell stories then you're not displaying honor."
Anyone else want to ask Senator Obama if he's qualified to run the nation if he's not aware his aides are busy engaging in the same thing he's condemning? What's sad about this is that we expected to see this. This neophyte just doesn't have a clue, and if all he's going to do is continue to whine about how he's being treated, he's going to seriously turn off a whole host of voters.
Voters don't like whiners. They want leaders. No one heard President Bush whine about squat in his eight years. He didn't whine about how he was viscerally attacked by the media and the Democrats. He didn't whine when Iraq wasn't going the way he'd intended. He didn't whine about the economic downturn. So, why is Obama whining, and doing so over questions that are seen as legitimate int he eyes of voters?
It's because he, like Hillary, is a baby at heart. He can't handle the heat and scrutiny that will be handed to him over the course of the next seven months. This kid's got nothing to offer this nation except condemnation, cluelessness, and a crass attitude. What a rookie. This is the big leagues. Man up and act responsibly. You can question Senator Clinton on her missteps, but God forbid anyone questions him? Give me a break. If I had the time and money, I'd heckle him at every campaign stop on those issues, and I'd do it until I got under his skin enough to make him blow his top.
THESE are legitimate questions. If he doesn't think so, then maybe he should save the superdelegates the hassle and bow out now.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 8:16 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home