2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll

http://www.votenic.com

Results Posted Tomorrow!

Check Back Weekly For Updates!

sorry, I was reading a separate Rasmussen poll at the time on Montana, so that one stuck in my mind when typing, obviously I was referring to the Quinnipiac poll... (the most interesting results from Rasmussen today, Landrieu over Kennedy 55-39, in what should be the Republicans best opportunity for a pickup...)

"interesting kruez. I heard that same rally you allude to on Potus this morning. The booing you allude to is HC's mentioning that Sen Obama felt that its bitter people who turn to guns and religion.They were clearly booing Sen Obama's statement but if you want to delude yourself and once again spin otherwise, knock yourself out. Expect to see signs tailing Sen Obama saying I do not turn to my religion because I am bitter."

Wow, seeing as EVERY person commenting on that rally, the WP, CNN, MSNBC, etc., all said they were booing Clinton, I must say your unbiased opinion sure must be right on...

Rasmussen has a teaser out tonight, poo-pooing ARG and implying their poll, to be released tomorrow, will likely show little-to-no movement:

"Other pollsters' numbers disagree with ARG's. Clay Richards, who runs the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute's Pennsylvania poll, said he doesn't expect his poll that will be published Tuesday to show much difference from the last one, which had a Clinton lead of six points. "I don't see that much movement in Pennsylvania myself," Mr. Richards said by phone from Harrisburg on Monday. He declined to comment specifically on his rival's contradictory numbers."

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/bialik_asseses_arg_teases_quin.php

Good luck with your side if Clinton steals the nomination, McCain now officially gets my vote between those two pathetic losers, and even maybe a check at the rate Clinton is now going (though after disparaging both San Francisco and Al Gore in the past 48 hours, I wouldn't be surprised if both Gore and Pelosi come out for Obama soon and put this thing to rest once and for all).

What to call the Wednesday Philly debate?

Simple:

"The Who Cares Debate: No One Cares Because They are Watching the Penguins Sweep Ottawa, or: What is wrong with those damn Flyers?"

CC- I dig the theme song at the end - first time I remember actually hearing it!

Novamatt, Do you think we have more leverage on Colombian union busting with no CFTA? I think that by writing enforceable ILO standards into CFTA an Admin that wanted to could help the trade union movement in Colombia.

The argument that we do not make treaties with bad guys is striking in its trade echoes of neocon foreign policy.

Mark, what drindl said. Words on paper don't mean much in a country where there's a nebulous but documented historical connection between the government and paramilitary death squads that have for years now been hunting down and killing people for wanting to join or organize labor unions.

Were that not the case then there wouldn't be such vociferous opposition to the agreement. Unions, like capital, are thinking globally.

poor, crazy dingbat drindl

you started the hate fest early zouk, all by yourself. you don't need any help in hating-- hating democrats is what you live for, apparently IS your whole life, since you spend your whole day here doing nothing but typing about how much you hate democrats.

since that's not considering a skill by most employers, i guess that's why you don't have a job.

BOGOTÁ, Colombia -- Lucy Gómez still shudders when speaking of the murder of her brother, Leonidas, a union leader and bank employee who was beaten and stabbed to death here last month. His murder was part of a recent increase in killings of union members in Colombia, with 17 already this year.

Lucy Gómez and Luis Humberto Ortiz recently discussed the killing of Ms. Gómez's brother.
"I want those who did this to pay for their crime," said Ms. Gómez, 37, a seamstress, clutching a faded photograph of her brother, an employee of Citigroup's Colombian unit who was 42. "But I feel in danger myself," she said. "This is not a country where one can express such a wish without fear of being eliminated like my brother."

I might add that a great many of the murdered union members work for American companies like Citigroup and Coca Cola -- and neither the companies themselves nor the Columbian government ever lifts a finger to investigate the murders -- thousands of them.

What happened to America? Have we become so greedy that we can ignore fascism? I was really surprised when I learned how many American corporate leaders like Henry Ford and Prescott Bush continued to financially support Hitler even when they knew he was systematically murdering Jews. But I guess I shouldn't have been, because obviously nothing has changed and American ideals were clearly nothing but an illusion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/14/world/americas/14colombia.html?em&ex=1208318400&en=5eff8ef36d2d81ed&ei=5087%0A

Liechtman - you are clearly from the angry hillary school of denial of reality.

drindl arrives and the hate-fest begins.

huh you posted the story and obviously added (and making noises that sounded like boos)(your added incaccurate slur b/c I bothered to notice that it was not in quotes and obviously came from you).

you can come here and act like a 2 year old and make juvenile insults but those types of comments reflect poorly on the candidate you think you can bamboozle us into believing with deliberate misinformation. Listen to the actual rally before you try and spin it into something that did not happen huh.

See http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/14/pennsylvania-crowd-jeers-clinton-attacks-on-obama/

It seems there is a difference between people not liking what Obama said and that translating into a vote for Clinton.

I see zouk has been on here all day, posting non-stop. Guess that's why you don't have a life or a job, huh? Not much skill at anything, I guess. You seem to be able to type, though, although your fingers don't seem to be connected to a functioning brain.

Leichtman - look you irate moron, I posted the article not the commentary. Take your idiotic 30 years of sitting on your toilet trying to pull your head out of your bitter hole.

Columbia has the worst record in South America for human rights abuses. Firefighters, nurses, teachers and others are all routinely tortured and murdered for the 'crime' of trying to unionize. A trade pact with this fascist country legitimizes this mass murder and will demean the United States even further in the eyes of the world.

As the International Trade Union Confederation reports: "...there has been no let up in the murders, attempted murders and death threats in Colombia and that the authorities appear to be no nearer to carrying out a full investigation into the crimes committed almost daily against the trade union movement."

As the International Trade Union Confederation reports:
"...there has been no let up in the murders, attempted murders and death threats in Colombia and that the authorities appear to be no nearer to carrying out a full investigation into the crimes committed almost daily against the trade union movement."

The murdered trade unionists come from all sectors, including teachers, bank, factory, and health workers.

Ironically, several of the murders this year took place around the march "For the Dignity of Victims" held in Colombia earlier this year. On March 6, 2008, over 200,000 people participated in the "March Against State Terror" in Colombia. Between March 4, 2008 and March 11, 2008, hundreds of organizers and human rights activists were threatened. The organizer of the march and four other human rights spokespeople were killed, along with four trade union leaders for the Confederation of Colombian Workers.

Colombia is the most dangerous place to live if you are a union leader, activist or member: 3,000 have been murdered since 1985, according to an annual survey of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions.
Others place the numbers of dead far higher.

"Colombia has a long and appalling record as the most dangerous place on earth for trade unionists, with dozens of killings taking place each year. Only a tiny fraction of these have been investigated properly. The government must fulfill its responsibility to protect trade unionists and end the culture of impunity which has reigned for so long", said ITUC General Secretary Guy Ryder.'

Novamatt, I had missed your take on Colombia directed to me.

I had read the treaty and it includes enforcement of ILO standards [the failure to enforce them is my pet peeve with China].

Here is a summary:
http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/pdf2html.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ustr.gov%2Fassets%2FDocument_Library%2FFact_Sheets%2F2007%2Fasset_upload_file363_13072.pdf&images=yes
I think the consensus is that this CFTA is a net gain for American exporters.

Spec, I just heard McC speak to the DC Press Corps and come out in favor of the Federal Shield Law. During the speech he described how the more open [and less scripted] a candidate was the more times
the candidate would say something s/he regretted and had to clarify. He was pointedly talking about himself - said that is why he liked town hall meetings because he could correct course during them if he
thought better of what he had said - but it is applicable to all of them, isn't it?

He sounded "not old" today.

huh I heard the rally. They were booing Obama's remarks idiot.
And king I have been involved in the market for 30 years and have my series 7 license so don't act like your 2 years in prep school have given you superiority b/c of your big porsche which certainly defines your core values and manliness and elitism.

proud: Talking about the Great Depression makes McCain sound like Bob Dole. As a lover of history, it pains me to say that nothing turns people off more than reminiscing about things that happened decades before they were born.

The last thing McCain wants to do is sound like Abe Simpson.

Why did Bill Clinton specifically include Al Gore in his recent reference to "elitists"?

Why did Obama specifically inject Gore's name into his presentation last night, saying he's one of those who believe Gore won the presidency?

Perhaps Barack already has his strategy, and it has less to do with Hillary than with Gore: If he loses PA by a significant margin, he announces that he's throwing his delegates to Gore, who then names him as presumptive VP nominee.

Hillary is checkmated, and the Dems have a chance to win. If the current scenario holds, Obama could lose out entirely. The Gore strategy makes him the kingmaker and uniter of a fractured and polarized party.

Plot precurser: the early '60s movie "The Best Man" starring Henry Fonda. It's prescient; check it out, Chris!

Leitchtman - I know you Libs have zero understanding of economics and finance but please don't confuse core values with core holdings.

From CBS News' Fernando Suarez:

PITTSBURGH - During remarks the American Manufacturing Organization today Hillary Clinton continued to push Barack Obama's comments that middle class Americans are "bitter" over their economic situation, but the political jab wasn't well received by the union crowd.

"I understand my opponent came this morning and spent a lot of his time attacking me," Clinton said as the crowd began to grumble.

"Well, you know, I know that many of you, like me, were disappointed by recent remarks he made," at which point members of the audience began saying "No!" and making noises that sounded like boos.

do you people think I should accentuate the "snow" in my name snObama. I would then go by Snow - bama

Or I could use the "snob" aspect now too. you can call me Snob oma.

either way it beats gutter ball.

this from the bloggers from the GOP who come here and brag about their Porsches and cigarette boats and tell us pretentiously how that represents their core values. Your last post GOP was a joke, right?

"I simply fly over those rubes, above the range of their guns. they don't even know what arugula is, poor fools."

Posted by: snObama

I can hardly wait to see the tv ads of that.

Obama "Where's the Whole Foods market? I can't afford the $10,000 piano and dance lessons either, I can relate."

By John Baer
Philadelphia Daily News

Daily News Political Columnist

SOME THOUGHTS on the latest diversion of Campaign '08, a campaign apparently hell-bent on keeping the nation mired in its own stupidity.
As a native-born, small-town Pennsylvanian, a son of native-born, small-town Pennsylvania parents - one from the coal region, one from Lancaster County - let me assure you that the so-called offensive, condescending things Barack Obama said about the people I come from are basically right on target.

"Bitter" perhaps best describes my late mother, an angry Irish Catholic who absolutely clung to her religion.

Dad, also a journalist, wasn't really bitter as far as I know, but he sure liked to hunt.

So, despite carping from Hillary Clinton and annoying yapping from her surrogates (really, it's like turning on the lights at night in a puppy farm), I take no offense.

What's offensive to me is suggesting that small-town, working-class, gun-toting and/or religious Pennsylvanians are somehow injured by a politician's words.

Are you kidding me?

They're injured all right, but the injury is long-term and from lots more than "just words."

They've been injured from decades of neglect by political cultures in Washington and Harrisburg driven by special interests.

They're injured by a system of isolated, insulated political leadership that protects itself and the status quo above all else.

They've been harmed by a lack of political guts to fix a health-care system that works against the poor and forces middle-class families to pay more for less, while at the same time giving politicians the best coverage taxpayer money can buy.

They've been taken for granted by political parties and candidates who stay in power by - and this was the apparent gist of Obama's remarks - forcing attention and debate on issues tied to guns, religion and race (precisely because such issues resonate) rather than real problems such as health care and the economy.

They've been consistently made fools of by their own elected representatives who, year after year, pull fat salaries ($169,000 for every member of Congress; $150,000 in salary, perks and benefits for every state lawmaker) with automatic raises no matter how little gets done.

A new Associated Press poll shows Congress' approval rating at 23 percent. And don't even get me started on the Pennsylvania Legislature.

Insulting?

What's insulting are the sizes of salaries and perks of politicians in a state where the median household income is $43,714.

What's insulting is the ongoing failure of elected "leaders" to deal with long-term, working-class worries while insuring their own futures with hefty, over-rich pensions.

And, look, what Obama said, given a charged atmosphere close to a critical primary, was ill-advised - not because he's wrong, but because it changes the discussion.

The 24-hour broadcast-news cycle will jabber on this for days - the irony being that Obama's "words," which had positioned him so well, now threaten to trip him up.

Another irony is that the candidate running to effect change where change is needed, and to offer hope to those without it, is suddenly tagged as somehow diminishing those he seeks to serve.

So the question is whether Obama effectively defuses this, as he did the controversy surrounding his former minister. And that remains to be seen.

Just don't tell me that he insulted a state or, given his background, that he's an out-of-touch elitist.

And I especially don't want to hear such arguments from a candidate who spent decades in the bubble of a governor's mansion, the White House and the U.S. Senate, and under the blanket of $109 million income during the last eight years.

Pennsylvanians might cling to religion and guns. I hope they don't cling to stupidity.

Send e-mail to baerj@phillynews.com.

For recent columns, go to

http://go.philly.com/baer.

interesting kruez. I heard that same rally you allude to on Potus this morning. The booing you allude to is HC's mentioning that Sen Obama felt that its bitter people who turn to guns and religion.They were clearly booing Sen Obama's statement but if you want to delude yourself and once again spin otherwise, knock yourself out. Expect to see signs tailing Sen Obama saying I do not turn to my religion because I am bitter.
Go ahead and delude yourself into believing that that faux pas will not effect Sen Obama in Pa or Indiana. Its like those same Repubs who desperately hold onto to W's 28% polling numbers and say it means nothing. If your side still wins the nomination you can totally forget wasting your time campaigning anywhere in the south b/c it will be Sen Obama who will likely be confronted with signs and booing reminding southerners of his comments. A far less controversial joke sunk John Kerry 2008 Presidential campaign, I just don't see voters saying never mind we don't care.

But the GOP doesn't have a standard game plan to attack moderates - except to paint them as extremist liberals, facts be damned.

Posted by: bsimon | April 14, 2008 2:09 PM

the advantage to the Obama candidacy, is that painting him as an effete out of touch extreme liberal is effortless. all you have to do is pay attention.

I said
"Of course, the Ds have their charicatures of Rs that they debate as well."

and sue obligingly posted a perfect example. Thanks sue.

Dave, I know this is the US, so we're not supposed to talk about social class, but there is an actual group of people who control most of the wealth in this country. Those people are the "elites."

I know that Republicans can in an instant soar to rapturous heights extolling the virtues of the middlebrow, but stupid stuff like wanting a glass of orange juice or observing that working-class people vote on stuff other than economic issues doesn't make anyone "elitist." It's just jaw-droppingly amazing that this is what the campaign has descended to already in April: who can drop their g's, or imbibe the right beverages, or wear the right shirts, whatever, in order to convincingly fake authentic ordinariness. McCain, the Navy aristocracy brat who's never drawn a paycheck from anyone other than Uncle Sam (and maybe Frank Keating) and who married into serious money, and Clinton, the Wellesley girl from the white-glove white-bread suburbs, the true authentic champions of the middle American working class. What a joke. What a pathetic joke. Pardon me while I go vomit.

JD, the efforts to derail the free trade agreement with Colombia are worse.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | April 14, 2008 1:12 PM

Mark, the sad thing is that this kind of raw, unadulterated (whooops), pandering to unions flies in the face of the 8 years of the Clinton administration. That HRC would a) rely upon her time as 1st Lady as her main qualification, while b) betray the important principles of free trade with one of our most important allies in S America makes her pretty much the embodiment of evil. OK, maybe not as bad as Saddam, Hitler, Osama, etc, but pretty bad.

Pelosi and Reed aren't far behind, after they tried (successfully I believe) to change the rules around fasttrack approval of treaties just so it won't have to be voted on until after the election.

A bunch of complete hypocrites and sc*mbags.

"The candidate, David Bellavia, who is running for the open seat being vacated by retiring Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-N.Y.), gave a short but oddly rambling and disjointed speech, closing with: "You can have your Tiger Woods, we've got John McCain."

The Racist party strikes again... what a surprise.

"No one should be surprised that the R's are trying to smear the D nominee as elitist and out-of-touch"

That's one of the tried-and-true methods of attack. Of course, the Ds have their charicatures of Rs that they debate as well. On the R side, they paint the D as an elitist and/or left-wing liberal. For instance, not long after the DFL (MN Dems) endorsed Ashwin Madia, the state GOP published a press release calling the former Marine & Iraq vet a 'left wing liberal'. Mr Madia is a self-described former Republican, until, in his words, the administration of "George W Bush." But the GOP doesn't have a standard game plan to attack moderates - except to paint them as extremist liberals, facts be damned.

Proud -

I simply fly over those rubes, above the range of their guns. they don't even know what arugula is, poor fools.

Vote for you candidate at Kareem Abdul-Jabbar blog:
http://www.latimes.com/kareem
how is that? :)

re "This provides an enormous opening for Senator McCain, who can frame this election as pitting a candidate who believes in self-government, against a candidate who believes in the nanny state."

Indeed...

John McCain today offered a different account of small town America than the one depicted by Obama to fat cats in SF:

"During the Great Depression, with many millions of Americans out of work and the country suffering the worst economic crisis in our history, there rose from small towns, rural communities, inner cities, a generation of Americans who fought to save the world from despotism and mass murder, and came home to build the wealthiest, strongest and most generous nation on earth.

"They suffered the worst during the Depression, but it did not shake their faith in, and fidelity to, America. They did not turn to their religious faith and cultural traditions out of resentment and a feeling of powerlessness to affect the course of government or pursue prosperity.
On the contrary, their faith had given generations of their families' purpose and meaning, as it does today."

If Barack Obama is the D nominee in the general election, the American people will have a clear choice between two different visions - Senator Obama's liberal, elitist philosophy and John McCain's faith in the small town values that continue to make America great. John McCain will not forget them or write them off. Neither should Barack Obama.

The French-British 30 year war was in final swing in 1796-1805. Jefferson was a Francophile. Hamilton was an Anglophile. Washington demanded neutrality for the sake of the existence of the new Republic.

Adams pledged to follow Washington's counsel and narrowly beat Jefferson in 1796. Adams refused to go to war against France. The Hamilton crew in his Cabinet agitated for war with France to allow Adams or his Federalist successor to win in 1800.
Instead, Adams sent JQA to France and got the non-aggression pact he wanted - thanks to Napoleon, mainly. So TJ won the 1800 election on the 36th ballot against Burr.
-----------------------
Cornyn has plenty of ammo against both BHO and HRC and this last week, if you read my previous post, you know I think they gave the Rs many gifts, not the least of which was BHO's faux pas. I do not see how Rick can beat Cornyn at this point. I do see that individual House races and the TX Lege may get us closer to two party status again if Ds turn out, and Is like me who just cannot abide Perry vote for Ds down ticket.

"At least one poll this morning now shows HC pulling ahead by 20% in Pa."

ARG, which has been the worst polling firm this whole season (acknowledged by blog critics on both sides), they seem to sway as much as 15 points every day. If SUSA, Gallup, Rasmussen, or one of those firms comes out showing a similar slide, I'd buy it, but after Hillary getting booed at her own rally today, I'm not so sure that whatever the CW is today will hold, especially if she tries to keep this going past Wednesday without moving on to something more serious and concrete. The story works to stop Obama's momentum, but I still say it's nowhere close to the gamechanger Clinoton's folks thinks it is, and if they continue to push it like this without redirecting the campaign now to something more substantive it will backfire.

On a deeper level, what we saw in Obama's comments is a glimpse into a particular worldview, one that animates his political philosophy (contemporary liberalism). Senator Obama seems to view ordinary Americans as bitter, often broken, small-minded objects of pity rather than anger, ostensibly in need of instruction from -- you guessed it -- Barack Obama. The words of Michelle Obama are worth recalling in this context. She has spoken about her husband pushing us out of our "comfort zones," saying "Barack knows at some level there is a hole in our souls" and "Barack is the only person in this race who understands that before we can work on the problems as a nation, we have to fix our souls. Our souls are broken in this nation."

This is the Politics of Meaning on steroids. If one views Americans as fundamentally needy children rather than competent citizens, one embraces the precepts of the nanny state -- the state that (in Margaret Thatcher's memorable phrase) takes too much from you in order to do too much for you. This provides an enormous opening for Senator McCain, who can frame this election as pitting a candidate who believes in self-government, against a candidate who believes in the nanny state.

Increasingly, Barack Obama appears to be the Candidate of Illusion. He presents himself as post-racial -- which is harder to accept than it once was, given his intimate, longtime relationship with a pastor and church that harbor deep and obvious racial anger toward whites. Obama presents himself as post-partisan -- even though in his time in the Senate he has done nothing to bridge the partisan divide, which explains why he has been endorsed by the rabidly partisan MoveOn.org. Obama presents himself as post-ideological -- even though he was named the Senate's most liberal member in 2007 by the respected National Journal. Obama is a public critic of free trade -- yet his chief economic adviser is quoted by a Canadian official as saying that Obama's position on NAFTA is politically motivated and insincere. Obama speaks about the importance of religious faith in his life and the life of the nation -- yet when speaking to a group of rich liberals, he implicitly denigrates people of faith, pairing them with people who have "antipathy to people who aren't like them" and who harbor "anti-immigrant sentiment[s]." He paints religious believers as folks clinging to crutches to better deal with their desperate lives -- only to insist last night that his words were actually a tribute to people of religious faith. So sayeth Barack Obama, "healer of broken souls."

Early on in this campaign I was impressed with Barack Obama as a thoughtful, inspiring, and admirable (if far too liberal) political figure. As the months have worn on, it's become increasingly apparent that the candidate is projecting mere shadows on the wall. Our Republic deserves better.

-- Peter Wehner, former deputy assistant to the president, is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

now, how to put the Obama paste back in the tube????

Proud, I had so focused on the false equation of "bitter=religion+guns" that I missed the disconnect on [no]free trade.

When the thread is appropriate I will criticize Rs for stupid panders, as I have often done, but this is stupid D pander day.

mark Adams was Ambassador to France, and they were impt allies and Adams lost to Jefferson in 1800. I thought the US was neutral and the Federalists opposed the war of 1812 but I read John Adams a year ago so maybe my recollections were incorrect. Curious more importantly your thoughts now about Obama's statement and their impact on Texas races.

the mask slips:

It is striking that Obama makes clear that he believes that clinging to religion is no different than clinging to guns, (-- we know his class of elitist Democrats has no respect for either the Second Amendment or deer-hunting --) racism, xenophobia, and anti-trade sentiment -- as if they are all equivalent signs of lack of education and gullibility. ......

Nor do most candidates seem to feel that the best way to help such people is by "closing tax loopholes for the rich," as Obama does. It is fairly shocking that Candidate Hope and Change thinks these people are rubes -- unlike the much better paid, if not more productive denizens of Hyde Park, Cambridge, or a random prep school in Hawaii. What does Barack Obama, of the international upbringing and elite education actually know about ordinary Americans?

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDdiODcwYWUzYWIxOGVmNDNjOWE1ZWUxNmFhZGNkOGE=

novamatt - "No one should be surprised that the R's are trying to smear the D nominee as elitist and out-of-touch...Can you imagine CC or anyone else in the MSM writing a piece about whether McCain's aristocratic background and present circumstances will hurt him with middle America? The very notion is laughable. We can't talk about such things. R elitism, which is to say, actual elitism, is out of bounds as a topic of polite conversation."

Is that really you? You are sounding, um, bitter today. First off, it is HRC who is firing the main shots. McCain is just chiming in. Secondly, being rich does not, in and of itself, make you elitist. You don't have to be rich to be an elitist. It is really an attitude one has. I am curious, however, what you think "actual elitism" is. And by aristocratic background, I sure you mean except for his time in the military.

So will the questions on Wednesday night focus on BHO's faux pas? On WJC's Colombian money? On bashing NAFTA? On Iraq strategy? On WJC's characterization of HRC's Bosnia moment[s] as a product of her being 60 and fatigued at 11P?

I forget who the bozos and bozoettes are at ABC. Are any of them good at framing questions and follow-ups?

I do not see how either one of these Ds comes out of Wednesday night stronger against McC. Even softball questions this week will remind everyone how the two Ds are messing up. A video of HRC nervously laughing and comparing the Colombia question to asking her to explain the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin will be enough to make her own supporters blush. If they have a
BHO video from SF... well, you get my drift. They would both do better if they cancelled for unspecified illnesses.

Mark, This one's for you :)

"Obama's remarks are problematic, said Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund, not just because it suggests Obama is elitist, but because he's being hypocritical about his position on trade.

"Barack Obama has been stirring up the anti-trade sentiment he referred to in that speech. He opposed the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which I think is a natural for Democrats to support because Colombia is one of our biggest allies in Latin America, he opposes NAFTA, and he's now been caught.

He's saying one thing on the campaign trail to the working class audience, and to the fat cats in San Francisco he lumps in all this anti-trade sentiment as something that is a negative. It's clearly a double standard, it's clearly a case of a politician being caught with their rhetorical pants down"

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/14/obama-accuses-08-opponents-of-being-washington-insider

weakness - meet spineless:

Jimmy Carter, who is generally acknowledged to have been the worst US president of modern times, is now turning out to be the most embarrassing ex-president.

Even so notable a statesman as the usually soft-spoken President Shimon Peres of Israel today publicly lashed out at Carter after meeting him in Jerusalem. Carter's "activities over the last few years had caused great damage to Israel and the peace process," said Peres.

In an unprecedented diplomatic snub to a leading American politician, Israel's prime minister (Ehud Olmert), foreign minister (Tzipi Livni) and defense minister (Ehud Barak) have all refused to meet Carter during his visit to Israel, which began today.

Carter is due to go on to Damascus where he says he plans to meet Hamas terror mastermind Khaled Meshal. Peres said that such a meeting would be a "severe mistake," calling Meshal a "murderer and terrorist."

Meanwhile, State Department officials, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, as well as several leading politicians from Carter's own Democratic party are pleading with Carter not to meet Meshal. Several of Meshal's victims have been Americans.

"Please don't confer legitimacy on a group that embraces violence and wishes to destroy Israel," several Democrats wrote in a letter to Carter.

Notable among those who have not criticized Carter is Barack Obama.

Reuters reports from Indianapolis:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Friday it was not his place to criticize former President Jimmy Carter... "I'm not going to comment on former President Carter. He's a private citizen. It's not my place to discuss who he shouldn't meet with," Obama told reporters while campaigning in Indianapolis.

I guess he couldn't vote present this time.

Mark, Colombia is a rotten country to be signing a free trade pact with. If D's sign on to that, then they were never serious about enforceable labor and environmental protections of any kind with anyone.

mark for some reason, and this is not a criticism, the questions to HC or maybe just her answers seemed to be more spiritual and Sen Obama's responses seemed to be more policy oriented with a secondary spiritual component.

But the Rabbi's question mark from the rabbi was about China and the moral implications about boycotting the opening was:

"BROWN: Another question from the audience. Rabbi Steve Gutow, who is director of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs is with us.

Rabbi?

RABBI STEVE GUTOW, JEWISH COUNCIL FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS: Senator Clinton?

CLINTON: Yes, Rabbi.

GUTOW: Back to China. China has continued to persecute and subject to oppression, the people of Tibet. It continues to be the largest supplier of weapons to Sudan and the largest purchaser of its oil. Let's just say China is not doing all it can to stop the genocide in Darfur. You have said that America needs to return to being a moral voice of the world.

Is our participation in the Beijing Olympics harmful to that moral voice?

CLINTON: Well, Rabbi, I appreciate your asking this question because I think it's a question of both political and moral significance. And that's why last week I called on our president to decide he would not attend the opening ceremonies of the Olympics because that is a public and very obvious ratification of our government's approval of the Beijing government's actions.

CLINTON: Unless the Chinese began to take very visible steps to begin to end the suppression of the Tibetans and undermining their culture and religious beliefs, and if we could get more cooperation out of the Chinese government with respect to Sudan.

And, of course, I would welcome even more action on behalf of human rights. But the challenge is, how do we try to influence the Chinese government? And I believe we have missed many opportunities during the Bush administration to do so.

In fact, I think it's fair to say our policy toward China is incoherent and that has not been in the best interest of our values or our strategic interest. So I would urge the president at least to consider and, therefore, publicly say that he will not be attending the opening ceremonies.

And let's see whether the Chinese government begins to respond because that for them would be a great loss of face and perhaps we would get more cooperation. We would get the process going that the Dalai Lama has asked for over many years.

There could be a lot of ways that the Chinese government demonstrated it heard our concerns.
ceremony." cnn

Vote for your candidate at Kareem Abdul-Jabbar blog:
www.latimes.com/kareem
How's that??

Once again, someone decides to try the "empty suit" gambit when describing Sen. Obama.

Just because the man doesn't spend all of his time on the stump spewing policy at us doesn't mean there's no "there" there.

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf

Here. Read that. A 64-page platform document. There's all the policy you need. Now shut up.

Watched "John Adams" last night, and was remi nded that many of the Federalists wanted war with France in part because it would insure a Federalist victory in 1800. Old story.

Then I watched my tape of the Ds talking to reporters about religion. One of HRC's questions came from Rabbi Steve Gutow, who I once knew as a Dem Party operative in Austin. I was so surprised that he was a Rabbi I did not hear his question.

I realize that if I had been asked questions like those I might have been "equal opportunity" offensive. The two Ds were remarkable for their not being offensive, IMO. If McC had been there, I am sure he would have been remarkably inoffensive, too. That is one trait that separates all of them from us; we expect them to be inoffensive and they try to please.

mark the poll looks like it was conducted fri, sat and sun. Turn on Potus right now zogby is talking about Pa and just said Sen Obama is only polling 28% of Pa Catholics HC 62% wonder what that is about. I am sure slime bag Cornyn will run with the Obama statement in Oct and try to sink all of our Texas candidates he has $5-6 million to start running negative commercials this summer Noreiga less than a $1 million to respond. Texas also do not think of themselves as Bitter people, even when oil prices were $10/barrel in the 80s.We generally look at ourselevs as optimists, the can do state, in my years as a native that has always seemed to be the sentiment here.

We learned in a previous debate that Hillary Clinton felt it was "unfair" (like all things not leading to her victory) that she tended to be called on first in past debates. This was so vitally important for us to understand that she took time to make the point in a nationally televised debate.

When I listened to the entire Compassion Forum last night, I was therefore surprised that she won the coin toss and chose... to go first.

Sigh. I'm so so tired of this candidate.

To Brian who posted at 12:16

I am "ridiculously" left-wing (including: vegetarian, atheist, pro-choice, anti-gun, well-educated and well-employed) and Obama's comments pissed me off.

You can't keep dismissing the people who view Obama as a smug, arrogant, condescending brat as just a bunch of mindless Republicans or - my personal favorite - "women of a certain age."

There are plenty of intelligent, liberal voters who are seeing disturbing patterns in Obama's behavior and history. There are plenty of us who would love to have the opportunity to vote for an energetic, qualified, visionary candidate and who think it would be a bonus if that candidate was not a white, Christian male. But as much as Obama wants to portray himself as that candidate, he just can't back up the propaganda. Obama is an appealing ideal, housed inside an empty husk.

He just doesn't have the substance to give life to all the hope his supporters have pinned on him. He can't get enough Democratic votes to win the primary and he clearly won't get enough to carry the general.

JD, the whole of Ds' pandering on [no] free trade is much worse.

Leichtman, that poll is pretty amazing.
Do you know if it was taken after this brouhaha became public? I read it, and apparently many respondents were turned off by BHO's ads.

Thanks for providing the link.

JD, the efforts to derail the free trade agreement with Colombia are worse.

http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/451/hillthemightyhunterjq3.jpg

egc I made it clear that that was just one poll and all of them use different methods to id leaners, soft supporters etc differently, but if that is a trend that might be something else. I am convinced now that if HC goes on to win Pa significantly and either wins or comes within 5% points in N Carolina she will be the nominee.

In my narrow calling this weekend for the campaign into rural parts of Pa 5 of the 8 people I spoke with who told me they were undecided at least on sunday, when I pushed to see which way they were leaning, 5 claimed HC,the rest said they still haven't heard enough, but its still 8 days and a debate out. Of the 47 calls I made I mainly got answering machines or folks who didn't want to talk and I totally avoided asking them about the Obama statement; thought that would be inappropriate.

I'm amused by the cynics who look at Obama's comments and say, "See, he's no better than the rest of us flawed, tainted, cynical, political, SOBs. Vote for me! I'm a much more EXPERIENCED flawed, tainted, cynical, political, SOB who can stand up to the other flawed, tainted, cynical, political, SOBs."

Wow, that really makes your candidate look attractive. No thanks. I'll take the guy whose not so good at being flawed, tainted, cynical, political, and an SOB.

Surprise
Gore Admits Financial 'Stake' In Advancing Global Warming

Algore admits to having "a stake" in a number of green "investments" that he recommend attendees put their money in instead of "sub-prime carbon assets" like "tar sands" and "shale oil."

the party of PT Barnum is finding suckers everywhere.

cedric: really curious how North Carolinans are feeling about being told that they cling to their bibles and guns because they are bitter. Folks down here in Texas not only feel those comments sting but actually challenge their religious values. The Obama campaign and their supporters this weekend have focused strictly on the word bitter but understandably have totally ignored his link between bitter, bibles, guns and immigration. We have some important local elections for district and State Supreme Justices in Nov.Rural counties will effect those races and several Congressional races one of which I am closely align with which I am sincerely concerned with how they might be impacted by the SF statement.

bsimon, obviously the Post wanted to say something while they still had a chance to influence his behavior.

But the damage is done. Obama cannot take the high road and be the darling of some post-partisan utopia, then go all political on us by going back on his commitments (or even considering going back on them) while still trying to appear as the white knight (so to speak).

Of course, his patronizing comments about Pennsylvania are almost as bad as HRC's (and Pelosi and Reed's) efforts to derail the Columbian free trade agreement.

What's disturbing about this series of comments from Obama is that they are undercutting one of his main lines of attack on McCain: That McCain has a nasty streak, and often says stupid things when speaking off the cuff.

It's going to hard for Obama (or his surrogates) to say, look, this is a nasty, hot-tempered, addlebrained old man, when Obama does the same stuff.

leichtman writes
"At least one poll this morning now shows HC pulling ahead by 20% in Pa."

ARG polls often fluctuate wildly. One week ago had Clinton-Obama tied; two weeks ago had Clinton-Obama separated by 14%. This latest poll was conducted partly after Obama's comments, but not completely.

Anyway, I doubt that Obama's comments are seen by actual voters nearly as strongly as Clinton and the Republicans, both of whom are invested in Obama losing. Clinton's reasons are obvious. The Republicans' reasons are the same as they always have been: Clinton is divisive and fires up the Republican base.

In other news, Minnesota Dems picked their endorsee for the open MN-3 (Ramstad) this weekend. Long-time political journalist Eric Black chronicles the event in this report:
http://www.minnpost.com/ericblack/2008/04/14/1498/well-spoken_madia_worked_his_brains_out_for_dfl_nod

Political neophyte (and recent convert from the GOP) Ashwin Madia will face Paulson (R) and Dillon (I) for the open seat.

I agree with Brian that no one will compare John Kerry - an old white Democrat who really is a has been, with the usually eloquent Barack Obama. But what Obama is showing is that and his family do have something in common with Kerry and that is Foot-in-mouth desease.

His "Bitter and cling to guns and religion" comments, his "don't want my daughters punished with a baby", his wife's "I have never been proud to be an American before", his "present" votes, his explanation of why he won't wear an American Flag in his lapel, his comment about Hillary in the NH debate, "Oh she's likable enough".

All these are comments that were unnecessary and will cause him potential irreprable harm in a general election if he is the Democratic candidate. Add these problems to his reverend problems, Meeks and Wright and you have the basis for a John McCain win in November and as a Democrat no matter how nice Obama is that is unacceptable.

Right now it is Hillary Clinton who has the best shot at beating McCain. Love her or hate her you can't dismiss that she has won two Senate races in NY even winning in upstate Republican areas in her reelection by nearly 65%. The Clinton brand love it or hate it has won two national elections for President.

Hillary is tested Obama is not. That is the conundrum facing the super delegates.

What Do We Call Wednesday's Democratic Debate?

1. The Obama Roast
2. Campaign Hill Raiser
3. Pennsylvania Crutch

When i first heard the comments I was upset that Obama could have made those remarks. I think he was playing to the crowd not figuring that this would get out

I angry to say the least and I'm a supporter, I could imagine what people must feel about him in PA right now, but evethough the words sting he spoke the bitter truth i Hope it doesn't cost him they end but if anyone can pull himself out of this telspin barack can and if his campagne is readig this take our man among the people with a camera and let them get to know him better

Cedrick

Obama 08

Identity divisiveness: check. Moral superiority: check. Softness on enemies: check. Shakiness on Israel: check. Questionable patriotism: check.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/greenwald/3337

JD, take note of sentence 2 of the editorial, which begins " Now he seems poised..."

Perhaps the editorial board should hold their fire until he's the nominee & they can write on what he does, rather than on what it 'seems' he might do.

Commentary Magazine, by Abe Greenwald Original Article

The radiant charm; the verbal agility; the promise of change; the post-racial unity; the deferential press; and most importantly, the vagueness of character and intent that sustained the whole façade. These were the hallmarks of Barack Obama's run for the Democratic nomination, and bit-by-bit, associate-by-associate, gaffe-by-gaffe, the junior senator from Illinois has given all of it back. (Snip) He is not, it turns out, an agent of change; he is a walking checklist of modern liberal inanities. Big government: check. Crippling taxes: check. Arrogance: check.

Carl Bernstein takes a hard look at a decidedly second rate candidate running a third rate campaign that, if successful, would give us a fifth-rate administration.

the hillary presidency. and this is what liberals are saying.

Interesting editorial today by the Post, they hammered Obama for going back on a promise

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/13/AR2008041301994.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Turns out he's just another politician after all, I guess.

leichtman writes
"At least one poll this morning now shows HC pulling ahead by 20% in Pa."

I wonder if that poll was conducted pre or post 'bitterness'.

HRC, is going to have to be careful here. Obama can throw her Bosnia comment right back in her face if she tries to say that his misquote is grounds to not vote for him.

Also it drives me up the wall when people think that intelligent people don't know the way the world really works. The thing is we DO know how the world works which is why we vote Democrat.

No one should be surprised that the R's are trying to smear the D nominee as elitist and out-of-touch. They'd have done the same to Hillary, to Edwards, to Gore, to Richardson, to anyone. They've been pulling this crap since '32 at least, but particularly since Nixon. It's about all they have anymore.

And what's so funny is that no one in the media is going to make a big deal about the McCain mansions, about McCain's lifelong privilege, about R policies that screw over the bottom 99% in favor of the top 1%. Can you imagine CC or anyone else in the MSM writing a piece about whether McCain's aristocratic background and present circumstances will hurt him with middle America? The very notion is laughable. We can't talk about such things. R elitism, which is to say, actual elitism, is out of bounds as a topic of polite conversation.

Sorry bonjedi - big government does not get to be branded R or D. It is a product of years of abuse. the sad part is that the rs have begun to be corrupted by the D methods as you have pointed out.

It is not that one party or the other is a superb manager and the other stinks. it is the design of an all encompassing government is simply flawed to begin with. you should not expect success.

to suggest that more and better government can fix all this is a fairy tale.

bonjedi: last week you argued with me that Senator Obama will win Pa going away. As I responded then I will hold you to that prediction. At least one poll this morning now shows HC pulling ahead by 20% in Pa. Guess those here who valiantly argued all weekend that the S.F. statement really meant nothing, might want to reconsider or at lest tell Pa voters how dare they.

http://americanresearchgroup.com/

Does the GOP seriously think anyone is going to honestly compare Obama and Kerry? Kerry is an old white guy from Massachusetts who couldn't fire someone up to save his life. He also had a bad case of foot-in-mouth disease. Unfortunately he is also incredibly intelligent, though the Republicans spent millions to convince the public that a worthy candidate was some weird foreign monster or something.

Fortunately Obama is a much better campaigner and a much better speaker...and the public is tired with the Republican tricks.

GOP logic goes something like this: if the far right doesn't like a candidate, act like the general public doesn't like a candidate and hope that they'll wind up following suit.

Obama's comments angered the ridiculously far right - the people clinging to guns, religion and anti-immigrant whining - and rung true with most Americans. Yet the GOP is content whining about complaining about Obama's comments because it angered their base. Good for them.

"the fix you can expect is along the lines of New Orleans after Katrina, Walter Reed after getting wounded, inner city schools after teachers unions, rate of return of social security retirement savings, low cost of Medicare, efficiency of congress, frugality of earmarks, etc."

I'm missing something. Katrina, Walter Reed, No Child Left Behind, earmarks - those are all Republican brands. Can there be any better example of how contorted this speech has become?

zouk, we expect much more from you. Stick to the basics - moonbats, drindl, Obama-is-Carter, etc.

so let me get this Lib reasoning straight:

If you are frustrated by the lack of action by the government to rule your life, you fall into rube behavior like religion, gun-play and even maybe, horrors of horror, NASCAR.

But if you just trust in the 21st century Barnum guy, he will arrange for the big friendly government to fix everything for you.

the fix you can expect is along the lines of New Orleans after Katrina, Walter Reed after getting wounded, inner city schools after teachers unions, rate of return of social security retirement savings, low cost of Medicare, efficiency of congress, frugality of earmarks, etc.

simply convert your christian faith into big government faith and all will be well, you can rise up to the elitist Lib version of the new order.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.