Did anyone see Obama on "This week with George Stephanopolis?"

[Roxy66]

He really rubbed me wrong when he was talking about Reagan, the Clintons, and the politics during that time. Among many things..he implied that the Clintons pushed the slime tactics during the 90's....I'm sorry... the Repugs took our Country into the sewer, not the Clintons. The Clintons have been through the sewer for 12+ yrs. I keep hearing that he was mis-understood, but everytime I hear that soundbite, I feel the same way...it pisses me off.

[Roxy66]

1. If anyone could post a clip...it would be great

[journalist3072]

2. What do you expect from a slime-ball candidate like Obama, who gets his talking points from David

Axelrod?

I'll give the Obama camp one thing----they are great at the swift-boat style campaign tactics.

They very successfully got black folks in SC thinking about those racist, MLK-hating Clintons.

[DURHAM D]

17. Not just his talking points...

Obama is David's creation - 15 years in the making. Obama was a lump of clay. David built him from scratch.

The only question is, did David do this for his own ego or is something much greater behind the facade. Obama's "help" into the senate and Michelle's high power job and board membership suggests some big players. Will we know before the primary is over? - Probably not.

David Axelrod's best friend is Rahm Emanuel. Who knows enough about Chicago politics to analyze the string pullers and the Obama/Axelrod/Emanuel alliance?

[indimuse]

25. Audacity of Hope..it also spoke to the failures of liberal government..read it!

Obama BASHES Liberals and Praises Reagan i n his BOOK Audacity of HOPE page 31
Edited on Thu Jan-24-08 06:41 AM by indimuse


Ed Shultz...You have lost a listener of 4 1/2 years,,,15 hours a week! You are a ZERO! on my book!

Gateway Pundit has the video.

In the best part of Obama's The Audacity of Hope, Obama, with some reservations, pours even more praise on our 40th president.


That Reagan's message found such a receptive audience spoke not only to his skills as a communicator; it also spoke to the failures of liberal government, during a

period of economic stagnation, to give middle-class voters any sense that it was fighting for them. For the fact was that government at every level had become too

cavalier about spending taxpayer money. Too often, bureacracies were oblivious to the cost of their mandates. A lot of liberal rhetoric did seem to value rights and

values over duties and responsibilities.

(Obama then veers off this brilliant thought pattern and digs a bit into Reagan's legacy.)

Audacity of Hope peaks early. The above passage appears on page 31.

[CalebHayes]

34. yeah, all I ever her from obama is negative negative negative

seems like he never gets around to talking about changing this country because he is so busy talking about hillary, and what a crazy racist bitch she is, all the time. That jerk.

:sarcasm:

[thunder rising]

3. Funny how it always happens to them and they are always the victim.

[Darth_Kitten]

4. He's the Teflon candidate..........

nothing his campaign throws out tarnishes him of course.

[FARAFIELD]

5. Well?

Hillary shouldnt have started it then. And he was right about Reagan as much as I detested him (Im a californian) he did get my mom and dad to vote republican the four times that they did. He had some magic to bring some groups (albeit some scary groups together).We have to be pragmatic about things if we are talking JUST charisma we will never understand Reagans as Right wingers will never accept the Clintons. I like her fine when she sticks to her message, but its not in her interest to drag down Obama. She should win it cleanly and not trying to soil a future leader (and ally if she is prez). She already has high negatives, why raise those in our own party. She looks uptight, uncool and lame when she does it.

[TeamJordan23]

6. I'm not sure what interview you watched.

He was again clear again in what he said about Reagan and he is right; we are at a time in history where we can expand our Democratic majority (in a way that Reagan did with the Republican party).

[Roxy66]

8. George asked Obama what specific ideas Reagan had that...

challenged the "conventional wisdom", (which is exactly what Obama said)...implying they were ideas that were good for the Country...Obama couldnt quite answer.

[Bluerthanblue]

13. challenging "conventional wisdom" doesn't mean good- ! for

cryin out loud!.

It means 'rocking the boat'- doing something different, bucking the status quo-

It is true, that the Reagan era changed things.- and NOT for the better.
He was, I believe the first "actor"- (a person who made their livelihood by "pretending to someone that they are NOT")
to become the leader of this nation.

That in itself says something- or should. :shrug:


peace~

[indimuse]

24. way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not...slime!

More on Obama's pandering to the right and praising of Ronald Reagan:

***In an interview Monday with the Reno Journal Gazette editorial board, Sen. Barack Obama riffed on a range of political topics ranging from Katrina, the home mortgage crisis and, of course, fodder from the campaign trail.

But perhaps the most interesting offering was when he tried to place his candidacy into a historical context. Which elections does Obama see as analogous to 2008? And with which presidents does he share personal similarities? That would be John Kennedy in 1960 (hardly surprising) and Ronald Reagan in 1980 (more daring). But not, it should be noted, Bill Clinton in 1992.

In fact, Obama offered praise for the Gipper, lauding him for tapping into the country's concern with the growth and "excesses" of the federal government, and its desire to "return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship" -- hardly a welcomed interpretation within progressive circles. Said the Illinois Democrat:

"I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what is different is the times. I do think that, for example, the 1980 election was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. They felt like with all the excesses of the 60s and the 70s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think he tapped into what people were already feeling. Which is we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."***

((((((((((o)))))))))) Unite Azz 1 Together wHOLly ((((((((((o)))))))))) copyright 1990 mbw

[DURHAM D]

18. Obama has less fiber than George Bush.

He seems to be the "air candidate".

[Windy]

15. They as in clintonites, have to keep this going because they think it helps them

SC proved that it didn't,but hey, go for it. You'll just hammer the nails in the coffin all that much faster.

[Joe the Revelator]

7. Oh comeon, the Clintons have proven in the last few months that most slime comes from them

[kelligesq]

16. George read Chicago Tribune on 0 to him this morning,practically said "tell the truth here on tv"

Chicago Tribune:

"Instead, as we've said, Obama has been too self-exculpatory. His assertion in network TV interviews last week that nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing strains credulity: Tribune stories linked Rezko to questionable fundraising for Gov. Rod Blagojevich in 2004 -- more than a year before the adjacent home and property purchases by the Obamas and the Rezkos.

One more time, Senator:

You need to divulge all there is to know about that relationship. Until you do, the journalistic scrubbing and opposition research will intensify. "


0 just talked about the land deal to George, not what the Tribune referred to -

Don;t think this is going away, then George said you've said you've given all the money from Rezko back, but there is three or four times more money than has been given back , and will you give his associates money back?

Apparently 0 received money from another associate of Rezko, and even hired this other associate's son in his DC capitol hill office.

Nope, doesnt look like this is going away. It's usually not the misdeed that gets them, it's the coverup.

[jefferson_dem]

9. Terrific showing by Barack.

On message.

Eloquent, dignified, passionate...presidential.

[george_maniakes]

22. I gotta admit every time i see obama speak he just seems more and more presidential...

loved how he mentioned how he's trying to stay above the gutter politics, and how he mentioned ALL PARTIES have a hand in letting the system get to its present state. His intentions and actions for a cleaner brand of politics is so refreshing.

[kurth]

10. The opportunistic revisionist at work

But gotta admire his UNITY pledge to work with Republicans and make the Gipper proud.

[polichick]

11. I wish Obama had never mentioned Reagan...

But he's right that we have an opportunity to build a majority. I'd like him to do some fence-mending within the party (reuniting with gays, boomers, those upset about the Reagan statements), but for me our choices have become very clear in the last couple of weeks.

Like it or not, Edwards doesn't move people in a way that will ensure a big win in November. SC was proof of that imo. I am grateful for his influence on the others, and I could definitely see him as AG.

After Hillary came back from Iowa and "found her voice," she sabbotaged herself. In allowing Bill to take such a big role in her campaign, she reminded people what it would be like to go back.

If we want to win, we can't go back.

[BringEmOn]

26. But, we can go back to Reagan? No, thanks.

[cboy4]

12. Oh my, he mentioned Reagan yet again? I'm going to

have to watch my tivo recording (if I can stomach through it).

[Windy]

14. He did a wonderful job in an obviously Clinton biased interview meant to keep the flames fanned

he held his own and did very well at keeping on message.

[nancyr]

19. Same interview I saw.

Funny how we all seem to have watched different interviews, isn't it? I saw an obviously pro-Clinton host conducting what seemed to be a hostile interview. I thought Obama did fine. What he said about Reagan was true: Reagan did change the political climate! Not for the better, but changed all the same. Gee, facts are facts.

[george_maniakes]

23. I wonder if george ever feels funny interviewing hillarys opponents in that he helped...

her husband win the white house? Does he maybe tone down the questions because he doesnt want to be accused of being biased?

[kelligesq]

28. Helllooo? Clinton biased? Stephanopoulis HATES the Clintons..you 0 propagandists

are really off the wall - will just say anything, true or not...put it out there
right.

[zulchzulu]

20. I thought Obama did very well

If you still don't get what Obama was talking about with the Reagan example of being able to get bi-partisan support to pass legislation, then there is nothing anyone can do for you. He explained it succinctly and was able to do it without getting his word distorted.

As for the Clintons, he was spot on.

[southern_dem]

21. I thought he did well n/t

[blues90]

27. I saw the show , the one on today 1/27/08

Obama did not answer one question with a direct answer . At one point he was asked again about the comments on Reagan and Obama came out with healthcare . what the hell was Obama talking about .

Obama has people in some sort of trance , in a cult following , he avoids and spins and votes present so he has no voting record to be tossed back at him , he covers his ass and the gets up on the stage with these long speeches as a preacher to the followers .

If this is what people want and insist on voting using their emotions inplace of their brains , then we are done .

The Obama speech refering to Reagan will never go away in my mind , you can't later spin the meaning of words that are on tape and in print , he may think so , he may get away with it with voters who never suffered through Reagans destruction or those who so easily fall into a trance .

Then to compare Obama to JFK . JFK was a senator many years longer , from a different time with different issues and JFK worked with a madman to stop what could have been the end of the wold as we know it .

With just this little said where does Obama compare to JFK . JFK's speeches were direct and spoke to the issues of the times , Obama speaks of some hope for all and I don't hear issues included or how he will change things or how people need to be involved to make change other than hope and hope won't cut it .

Mnay hoped we would not bomb Iraq , many hoped we would keep our jobs and healthcare , many hoped but all have failed and it was a spin off of Reagan called bush who did this mass destruction , who spoke about terror and ramped up the mass destruction we see all over the world right now . To include in this destruction of Reagan and Bush was the help of the very same lying media people sucked into right now , the very same corporate owned and controlled media .

All ther TV coal company sponsored debates with all the corrupt talking heads asking the soft insane questions brought people to the point where they do not know the candidates at all and are sold on just what the media chose for them .

I don't care what Dems now back Obama , look at what these Dems have done in the last year , all but a few have caved . We were told 2006 was the most important election of the times and look how this turned out , now it's 2008 and what we have are more lies and spin and crap .

We have exactly what the media wanted a making of history bewteen race and sexism with an outcome that could very well blow up in our faces . Race and sexism are so deeply imbedded in american society that now suddely an election wil some how change these mindsets , give me a break .

[Stephanie]

30. Stop your distortions. Read the transcript >

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4232064

[kelligesq]

31. would you mind putting up part of transcript about Chicago Tribune ? :)

[Stephanie]

32. Was that from today's interview?

I don't have time to transcribe anything more, but the video is here if you'd like to do it >


http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4197048

[blues90]

33. I saw the interview as did my wife , we can both still hear too

So why should I have to endure watching it again . Obama did not answer one direct question and Obama jumps on every talk show he can get on and spins everything after the fact . Perhaps you should watch the show again .

Maybe you are so set on Obama your judgement is fogged , what will you say if he wins and all the talk is just talk and nothing changes .

I would say people are making their calls far to soon and have a closed mind .

For me personally Obama was ok , not my pick but ok until he first bashed the boomers and then later came out with the Reagan statement .

If Obama had said a very simple thing all of this could have been avoided , all he had to say was Reagan did not have good ideas and to bring up eccess without defining it and use the last 15 years as an example .

I was 31 when Reagan blew in and I don't recall people before Reagan looking for a new way forward with clarity and projection , no we had a way , what we needed was a president to pull it of and Reagan was not the one without doubt . Carter was handed a mess and was blamed for everything and called by most peanut farmer . I knew damn well Reagan was a fool and an actor and not presidential material however the media sold him just like they are selling Obama . When Reagan was governer of calif and the protests were going on , Reagan got off his chopper and said he wanted a blood bath , this was in reference to the youth protesting . So to even bring up the name Reagan even without clarification was a stupid move with one motive , to get the votes of the Reagan democrates . Then to bring Clinton into this with Nixon was a slap in the face to many , so Obama expects no back lash ?

[itsrobert]

29. Obama is a big phony

America needs a tough leader, not another republican butt licker.