Dark Lord Karl Rove notes that Sen. Barack Obama’s post-Wisconsin, policy-oriented speech provides an entree for his Democratic and Republican rivals to attack:
Until now, Mr. Obama has been making appeals to the center, saying, for example, that we are not red or blue states, but the United States. But in his Houston speech, he used the opportunity of 45 (long) minutes on national TV to advocate a distinctly non-centrist, even proudly left-wing, agenda. By doing so, he opened himself to new and damaging contrasts and lines of criticism.
***
Mrs. Clinton can do much more to draw attention to Mr. Obama’s lack of achievements. She can agree with Mr. Obama’s statement Tuesday night that change is difficult to achieve on health care, energy, poverty, schools and immigration — and then question his failure to provide any leadership on these or other major issues since his arrival in the Senate. His failure to act, advocate or lead on what he now claims are his priorities may be her last chance to make a winning argument.
Mr. McCain gets a chance to question Mr. Obama’s declaration he won’t be beholden to lobbyists and special interests. After Mr. Obama’s laundry list of agenda items on Tuesday night, Mr. McCain can ask why, if Mr. Obama rejects the influence of lobbyists, has he not broken with any lobbyists from the left fringe of the Democratic Party? Why is he doing their bidding on a range of issues? Perhaps because he occupies the same liberal territory as they do.
***
These stands represent not just policy vulnerabilities, but also a real danger to Mr. Obama’s credibility and authenticity. He cannot proclaim his goal is the end of influence for lobbies if the only influences he seeks to end are lobbies of the center and the right.
That seems logical, but it may take time for that logic to sink in with this year’s audience for Ivy League populism. And it might never sink in with some of them.
hahaha
look how the Architect made his bones.
knittin a devils bargain with evangelicals, who now think they run the republican party.
Huckabee for veep!
educating the electorate? dream on.
TEH POOR! is LIFE! for democrats.
its emo, dontcha know?
when I hear Obama speaks, I recall the material I have read about Trotsky and the passions he ignited in his audience.
Interestingly, how after the 8 years of reactionary idiot in WH , American public is ready to submit to the “friendly” inspirational hugs of the proto-socialist.
They’d have to be severely lacking in situational awareness to think that. Rove made his bones by getting a coalition built that carried elections, period. We call it winning.
Obama lacks gravitas.
whatever that means.
Which is somewhat the point.
pablo both of those are true statements
the evangelicals were part of the coalition.
Move on thinks it runs the Democrat party, and they may be right. If evangelicals think they’re running the GOP, they’re not paying any attention to reality. I don’t see any evidence of that. I see more frustration from them than feelings of political dominance.
You’ve seen who the nominee is, right? Do you suppose they think expanded, federally funded ESCR isn’t going to be the law 18 months from now?
Clinton’s been out of office for eight years. Who are you saying is a “reactionary idiot”?
Coming Out.
Reactionary is the Communist way of saying not down with the program.
British professionals flee socialist paradise.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/21/nexodus121.xml
geez pablo dont be obtuse
they wud have lined up behind romney if they didnt think they were holding.
Sure, nishi. The Extreme Godbotherers think they’ve got McCain completely in the tank for them. Uh huh. Yup. Definitely. That must be it. Clear as day.
Or maybe, nishi, your bigotry is once more clouding your perceptions.
Good lord, at least be aware that you may not know everything!
The Extreme Godbotherers think they’ve got McCain completely in the tank for them
????
they want Huckabee.
Dan.
Reactionary, without invoking the works of Karl Marx, or Vladimir Lenin, in my simplistic mind can stand for screwing what was good and bringing your country down….
Karl Rove?? That irrelevant kingmaker whose monarch dumped him? I think Obama is facile enough to deflect or reframe any policy criticism. No, this dogfight has already careened into smear mode, and I predict a backlash.
Huh. That’s an odd definition, and hardly applies to Bush.
Then ignore him, and any story about him.
And you think that they think they’re gonna get him? That they’re running the party? Or are you just in autocontrarian mode?
oh i dont think so..i think they will fracture the coalition if hucks not veep.
and i think u need every vote.
the problem with single issue voters….is that is if Mccain has promised to fund ESCR…..they will stay home.
Careful, nishi. That last comment almost looked like it was written by someone with an education.
ESCR is already funded though… they tax my ass for that here in California while running a $16B deficit. Damn but Democrats are dumb.
Obama is for the Future, how can McCain be against a Future of Hope? Because in the Past we lacked Hope for a Future with Hope. Why? Because the Past cannot be changed, and What Divides US keeps us from Hope in the Present, where the Future of Hope resides. Those who stand for The Things That Divide US cannot give us Hope, for division is not Hope and Hope is the Future which springs from the Present Without Divisions.
The Audacity of Trope.
McCain has voted in favor of it twice. No matter who the next POTUS is, ESCR on excess IVF embryos is going to be fair game for federal funding. It’s going to pass Congress for the 3rd time, and none of the potential Presidents is going to veto it.
Shhhh….don’t nobody tell the evangelicals. They think they’re in charge.
big difference
they think they can be.
watch them try to cram huck down ur throats.
LIFE! is not a rational issue.
Also, in the Past, you could put a kid or two through Princeton on a city worker’s salary.
Which I’m still trying to get past. My dad couldn’t even send me to a state university, never mind Princeton.
To do what?
But you said they think they are. See your #1.
I hope this isn’t the change we were hoping for.
Stupid HTML.
“#Comment by sashal on 2/21 @ 9:17 am #
Dan.
Reactionary, without invoking the works of Karl Marx, or Vladimir Lenin, in my simplistic mind can stand for screwing what was good and bringing your country down….”
The only reactionaries I see around here are leftist, perveyors of a dead, shambling, stinking zombie corpse of an ideology.
hahaha
got me pablo.
lets try, think they were, are, and can be again.
its true that if they were in total control Huck wud be the annointed instead of mccain right now.
but i think its like humptydumpty.
if Huck is veep i think that will turn off a lot of voters too….like feets.
Huck is a twoedged sword i think.
u cant put the pieces of the winning coalition back together again.
Oh, so you think that evangelicals see themselves as a demographic that requires consideration in the body politic. Why didn’t you just say so? They are.
well….why does LIFE! have to be a plank in the conservative manifesto?
its religion.
Life is religion?
The atheists are gonna be pissed when they realize they’ve been dead all this time.
“well….why does LIFE! have to be a plank in the conservative manifesto?
its religion.”
While we know you are not the brightest bulb on the string, nishi, even you should know that abortion is by no means a slam dunk in this country, and it never has been. It’s not just the “xtians” that have a problem with it. Polls have long shown that the country is pretty well split right down the middle (roughly 50/50) on being pro- or anti-abortion (and it’s something like 80/20 for that barbarity known as “partial birth abortion”).
Why do you think they had to go through the courts to get abortion legalized, just as the proggies have for so many other things that, if left to the electorate, would have been shot down in flames?
No, it’s not just the religionists who have a problem with it.
And while Pablo is probably right about ESCR getting federal money down the road, it’s not going to buy Michael J. Fox or anyone else a goddamned thing. Not every problem can be solved simply by throwing money at it. If that were so, things like cancer, AIDS and the like would have been cured long ago. Besides, there’s nothing stopping any researcher anywhere from using abortion-derived stem cells right now in their research. They just won’t be paid by the Feds.
Given how much money the drug companies already spend on research, you can bet your ass that if there was anything significant to ESCR, they’d be all over it like white on rice. But they are not. Ever wonder why? Believe it or not, not every new development in science and technology requires largesse from Uncle Sugar’s Golden Teat….
I will try not to gloat when Huck is not Veep and ESCR turns out to be much bigger deal for nishi than it is for evangelicals, a group about which nishi apparently knows very little.
Karl – Usually, when someone starts spewing about evangelicals, it becomes readily apparent quite quickly that they know little about them. Much like those that throw around the term neocon.
I’m indifferent to the religious or moral aspects of the question, but where is the Constitutional authority for federal funding of ESCR? It’s not a road, a court, mail, or defense, which pretty sums up the federal government’s defined role.
“pretty much>/i>” that should say…
Crap, I give up. Maybe some lunch would improve my typing.
“…when I hear Obama speaks,I…”
I call racism! on a word-salad!
the problem with single issue voters….is that is if Mccain has promised to fund ESCR…..they will stay home.
And vice versa?
Not every problem can be solved simply by throwing money at it. If that were so, things like cancer, AIDS and the like would have been cured long ago.
This is why they’ve gotten away from throwing money, and started walking instead. “We’re 10 kilometers closer to a cure!”
Jim, find the Constitutional authority for the 28 bllion dollar/year NIH and you’ll find the authority for ESCR funding.
Nope, can’t find that either, Pablo. People might be amazed by the shit you just can’t find in the Constitution. Oddly enough, it does say the President functions as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Imagine that.
nope i wont stay home.
im voting for Obama.
im a registered republican,hehe, even a hereditary one.
but im an obamacan now.
i asked an honest question.
why is pro-LIFE! a part of the conservative manifesto?
“Governor Bush and Congressional Republicans anticipated Greer’s adverse ruling well before it was delivered and worked on a daily basis to find an alternative means of overturning the legal process by utilizing the authority of the United States Congress.”
here is an instance where i think pro-LIFE! is anti-constitutional.
is that an attempted violation of the separation of powers?
and certainly the idea that “human life” begins at fertilization impact is anti-scientific.
a fertilized egg or a blastula doesnt have the substrate to support consciousness.
and most americans believe abortion should be legal in most or all cases. 57 to 40 is the latest poll.
i have a degree in statistics.
that is not “evenly divided”.
that is not an even division.
human-life-at-conception is a religious idea.
and shud not be part of the republican party i think.
Dammit, it wasn’t until #24 that I finally decoded ESCR. [btw, thanks Pablo.]
and my strong opposition to bush’s veto on the ESCR expansion bill was that he imposed personal religious values contra the will of the people.
why is the religious dogma of pro-LIFE! convolved with conservatism in this country?
can’t i be a conservative and not embrace the anti-scientific postions of the pro-LIFE! movement?
is this why?
“Evangelicals comprise about a fifth of the U.S. population and according to Pew surveys account for at least a third of the Republican electorate, giving them serious clout in politics.” …
nishi need good muslin husband to obey
then no need worry abt science and religion
do whats tld…….no wrry abt high iq and g spot
burqa burqa burqa
hahahaha……you stoopid
no one converts to islam without coercion unless crazy or pop fashionista
link
wow
that was quite rude.
cya
u cnt hndl truth
Really?
‘Cause, I figure the sperm and ovum are human, and alive, even before conception. Then when they fuse, it’s a whole new human life. Genetically speaking.
No religion involved at all. Just science.
Where things get unscientific is where people claim they can draw a line and say, “Before this point, that human life isn’t a person yet.”
‘Cause defining personhood isn’t scientific. It might be religious, though.
Nishi, do you know the etymological root of the word “define”..?
Wow McGehee, that was very elegant!
I don’t generally hear pro-lifers arguing about personhood.
@ #11 geez pablo dont be obtuse
@ #52 that was quite rude
You owe me a spleen, potsi.
The irony of nishi complaining about “single issue” voters is rich. Also, good point McGehee about what constitutes human life. nishi doesn’t believe in souls then I take it? That’s cool for say an athiest to believe in. But she claims NOT to be an atheist. So, I guess we gain our soul (ie humanity) when we get our substraight. Is that what sufis believe? I can completely see an atheist’s support of abortion. I just can’t see a believer’s support for it. How can you believe that a blastula is not a human life? It was created by humans using human DNA. Personally, like most people maybe, abortion is just so hard for me to come to grips with. Personally, I think it’s a human life, but do I force others who do not share that view, to go along with me? I don’t think so…Man, this is tough for me.
@ #49 he imposed personal religious values contra the will of the people
Kerry-49
Bush–51
OKA; the Obamican-Contra Scandal.
Statistics, you say?
sfg im cdo
Would anyone here believe her if she said she had a degree in English?
Ruhollah Musawi Khomeini.
Does anybody believe 1/4 of what she says? Does anybody care?
Jimmy Carter.
64 & 66.
Godspeed. IOU.
Why does DEATH have to be a plank in the liberal manifesto?
Pablo, you forgot the cute little puncuation mark. I’m thinking a a semi-colon followed by a right perenthesis. Death;)
#
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 2/21 @ 4:34 pm #
wow
that was quite rude.
cya
Sos lying.
cya.
Because there’s no drug involved. Ever wonder why Toyota isn’t funding such research? Or trying to find the next boner pill?
Because it matters to quite a few people who agree with conservatives on a whole bunch of other issues?
Have fun voting for Obama. What, exactly, does he stand for? How do you square the policies he’s argued for with your claim to be conservative? How about squaring them with your belief in SCIENCE?
Paid Surveys sometimes pay a great deal of cash too’*`
some paid survey sites are actually scams so avoid them`,`