Obama Takes on the Queen of Hearts
At one heated point in Monday night's Democratic debate, a perturbed Barack Obama finally blurted out to Hillary Clinton what millions of others have been thinking these past weeks. After Clinton said that what her husband says might be different than what she says or what her campaign says, Obama disgustedly said "I can't tell who I'm running against sometimes."
Sorry it's come to this, but this Democratic primary nominating process has, indeed, become all about Bill Clinton. Thanks to Hillary Clinton.
The ex-president has been rolled out as campaign attack dog to bark, bite, snap and tear away at Obama in a way that Hillary -- as candidate -- cannot and will not.
Hillary can't have it both ways. You can't deploy the clout of your husband the ex-president in the middle of your campaign and then not take responsibility for every word he utters, every action he undertakes. Right down to his shameful direct intervention in a crucial polling place in last Saturday's Nevada caucuses.
But there's deeper point. Who exactly is Hillary Clinton anyway if not someone who has parasitically attached herself to the legacy and record of Bill Clinton? Without having been his First Lady, if not exactly his only lady, Ms. Clinton would be but a corporate lawyer turned junior senator from New York and with a less than sterling voting record -- including her authorization of the war in Iraq, approval of a war-mongering resolution on Iran and an inglorious bill to criminalize the national epidemic of flag-burning.
"Elections are about the future," Clinton said tonight, parroting the most moth-eaten of campaign clichés. But Hillary has made it strictly about the past as her only affirmative argument for the future is to resurrect the politics of the previous decade.
In Monday night's debate, all three candidates went at each other. But Obama finally opened up some cuts on the Clintons, calling out Hillary for lecturing him about supposedly being soft on Reagan. "While I was working in the streets watching those folks watch their jobs shift overseas," he said staring at Clinton and referring to those who suffered under Reagan's policies, "you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board of Wal-Mart."
It might be too little too late on Obama's part. But it was absolutely the right thing to do. Hillary has made Bill, his record, his approach to politics, his policies, his style and her embodiment of all the above the central issue in the campaign. The only honorable position for any opponent of Clinton's is to take her -- and him -- on.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
MARC----I KNEW I COULD COUNT ON MORE MEN-BLOGGERS AGAINST A WOMAN PRESIDENT. YOU WILL BE SO WELCOME TO THE FOLD.
WHY ELSE WOULD YOU WANT OBAMA WHO IS NOT EXPERIENCED AT ALL OVER HILLARY WHO IS FULLY QUALIFIED TO LEAD---INTELLIGENT ---AND UNDERSTANDS WHERE WE NEED TO GO.
OBAMA IS ALL TALK---
MAYBE 10 YEARS AND IF HE GETS SOME EXPERIENCE MAY BE QUALIFIED BUT AT THIS TIME IN OUR HISTORY WE NEED HILLARY AND A WOMAN FOR REAL CHANGE. MEN HAVE HAD THEIR CHANCE AND BLEW IT.
I'm sure someone has made this point already, but Hillary parlayed her stint as First Lady - and the decidedly non-First Lady-like tasks her husband gave her, including spearheading the abortive 1993 effort to reform health care - into her 2000 New York Senate victory.
Without her husband, she would likely not even be a senator. Without her husband, if she were interested in a political career, would have had to climb a more conventional political ladder, running, and if successful, serving, say, as a state senator first.
brilliant article...excellent points...I am now a "fan" of Marc Cooper :)
"It might be too little too late on Obama's part. But it was absolutely the right thing to do."
No, it's not too late. I live in Ohio and don't get to vote until March. Other than that, great article!
Obam has a nuclear connection--and it's name is Exelon.
A quick search at opensecrets.org finds that executives from Exelon Corporation, the Chicago-based nuclear power company, have donated $171,350 to his presidential campaign.
Obama, has a health care industry connection, too.
And Obama is against single payer, Medicare for all.
Go down the list, from one industry to next.
Obama is being hemmed in by corporate power.
While idealistic young people are swooning over Obama's message of hope, faith and change--no one inside the beltway has any doubts about the corporate connections.
The Hill reported earlier this year that three of Obama's top fundraisers were registered as lobbyists in 2006.
Fred Hiatt in the Washington Post in June 2007 compared Mitt Romney's foreign policy to Obama's.
Conclusion--"the similarities dwarf the differences"
"Both want bigger, not smaller armed forces," Hiatt wrote. "Obama calls for an additional 92,000 ground troops, Romney for 100,000."
As he approaches the White House, corporate control over the Obama will tighten.
And he'll get along by going along
America is in a tough spot.
We're done with hope and faith.
We need independent leadership and action.
"One of the best kept secrets in America today is the extent to which hope and faith are being used as seedy substitutes for action and reason," wrote DC journalist Sam Smith recently."As they say in the 'hood, hope don't pay the cable. Someone like Obama functions as a political sedative. His message is that we don't have to worry so much about what's happening because we can let the future handle it. This is not audacious. It's either a con or cowardice."
We need a movement to overcome a culture of corporate crime, corruption, power and control.
We need grassroots citizen action, for a change.
Hillary is not going to cut the mustard.
And neither is Obama
Cooper with all due respect, I think you are a bad excuse for a journalist. Your title where you refer to one candidate by its name and to the other by a derogatory remark is unfair to say the least. What would you think of an article whose title goes something like this: "Hillary takes on Ayatollah Hussein" not fair is it?
Do your homework investigate Obama's background so we know as much about him as we already know about Hillary's past. no more free ticket for Obama PLEASE
This is my take on this.
I have long thought that Bill will be Hillary's Achilles heel. And the Republicans know this. That should Hillary win the Dems nomination - and should either McCain or Giuliani be the Rep's bet - it will be easy to bring down Hillary.
But in the event Obama gets the nod, that is a real fight for America's heart and soul. And in this kind of fight, Obama wins over either Rudy or MacCain.
What a load of BS. It wasn't Hillary who made Bill the center of attention. It's the media. They can't seem to take their eyes off him. Now would you please concentrate on the candidate.
november 28th 2007
“Even though I approved of Afghanistan and opposed Iraq from the beginning, I still resent that I was not asked or given the opportunity to support those soldiers,” Clinton said.
may, 2003
“I supported the president when he asked for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,” he said in May 2003, the same year he was quoted praising Bush’s handling of the war.
how could anyone vote for hillary when she is married to a serial liar?
the republicans will smear both clintons relentlessly if she gets the democratic nomination. the evangelicals will come out in droves. many dems and independents will not vote or will vote against hillary. romney or mccain will win.
if the dems nominate hillary they will see themselves once again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Marc Cooper, you talk as though this race is almost over. It has only just begun. The dems divide up delegates from the states. It's not winner take all. So, if Barack does well in New York, which it is predicted that he will, he will get part of the delegates, same for California where Independents can vote. Are they going to vote for Hillary, I don't think so. Obama could pull off a big upset in California. With young voters, AA and independents. It can be done. He will also win in the south, Georgia, Alabama and in the west, Colorado, Idaho, Montana.
I refuse to believe all the Willie supporters tht turn a blind eye to his lies! Hillary took up some of them last night. When he eliminates words or obvious reasons for actions taken by Obama he is just a bald faced liar!
I am a Edwards supporter and would vote for the Hillary but I would love it if.......
Bill would use the medical benefits he gets and either go into rehab or get after some anti depressants.
If anything was obvious last night it was that Obama is a deep thinker and a very articulate speaker. His vocabulary is mind-boggling (sometimes he comes off as a mad professor) and Hillary is like a valley girl with limited vocabulary (you know ... you know ... you know ... like ..... like) and screams like a chiwawa mexican dog. Very unpresidential. She is a disgrace to the American society. Somebody should put that dog to sleep.
Edwards/Obama 08
Win or Lose, Obama needs to come out and say what half the country, over 150 million people, think of, and why they do not like the Clintons .
Sure there was good stuff, and good campaigning but there were many many unsolved changes that never were realized.
The country rejected the Clintons in 2000 with their surrogate Al Gore and overwhelming rejected their Party Machine in 2004.
Obama needs to come out and say everything Republicans Democrats, and middle class whites do not like about the Clintons, and apparently Blacks are starting to see the light too. This would be a voting block, Republicans, White Democrats and Blacks, that Obama may count on winning with, if he just gambles. Win or Lose.
Some firmly believe, including Sen. Chuck Schumer, that this Dem, nomination will not be decided up until the Convention in Denver come August 2008. Proof behind this is that neither candidates are running away with any states, so far
When Hillary loses to Obama she loses big, when Obama loses to Hillary he comes in a Close second, and there is no saying if Edwards will turn the white male and populist dems in the populist states around and to his side. If Obama loses in SC I still see him in the race until the convention.
There is still a long way to go, and the Ghettoizing of Obama, per se as Pat Buchanan put it, will be on the minds of many delegates and voters come November. When Brarack trascended race in Iowa, why did Bill and Hillary Clinton help to make sure this transcendence was one their Democratic followers would not take?? Its the Democratic party after all, ??. If the Clintons do this to the Black candidate just think of a viable Hispanic or Asian candidate, or ethnic female in the future??? When Condolezza Rice transcended in in the Republican party and so many other blacks and latinos that work in that administration that we don't hear about.
Maybe in some unintentional way the Clinton's will have created a viable Independent party by destroying the Democratic party because of their Messiah complex. I have Republican males friends considering Obama or McCainI and not buying the Clinton's Ghetoizing of Obama,, As a conservative thinking but forwarding thinking white male, a Dynasty, Queen or KIng is not in the cards for this nation.
Some firmly believe, including Sen. Chuck Schumer, that this Dem, nomination will not be decided up until the Convention in Denver come August 2008. Proof behind this is that neither candidates are running away with any states, so far
When Hillary loses to Obama she loses big, when Obama loses to Hillary he comes in a Close second, and there is no saying if Edwards will turn the white male and populist dems in the populist states around and to his side. If Obama loses in SC I still see him in the race until the convention.
There is still a long way to go, and the Ghettoizing of Obama, per se as Pat Buchanan put it, will be on the minds of many delegates and voters come November. When Brarack trascended race in Iowa, why did Bill and Hillary Clinton help to make sure this transcendence was one their Democratic followers would not take?? Its the Democratic party after all, ??. If the Clintons do this to the Black candidate just think of a viable Hispanic or Asian candidate, or ethnic female in the future??? When Condolezza Rice transcended in in the Republican party and so many other blacks and latinos that work in that administration that we don't hear about.
Maybe in some unintentional way the Clinton's will have created a viable Independent party by destroying the Democratic party because of their Messiah complex. I have Republican males friends considering Obama or McCainI and not buying the Clinton's Ghetoizing of Obama,, As a conservative thinking but forwarding thinking white male, a Dynasty, Queen or KIng is not in the cards for this nation.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
