Just How Soft has Obama's Coverage Been?
by Taylor Marsh
Marshmallow soft.
Down pillow soft.
Baby's bottom soft.
So no one should be surprised that Obama had a a nightmare night. He finally got real questions for which he should have had ready answers. Over the last year Barack Obama has gotten a complete pass on his record, his life and everything associated to his political rise. In fact, if Senator Obama had been subjected to the scrutiny that Hillary Clinton has been subjected to he would have turned to ash by now.
So forgive me if all the blogospheric bellyaching permeating Democratic circles is not impressing me much. In fact, it's a laugh out loud moment.
Now don't get me wrong. I'm more than willing to blame the traditional media for piling on a Democrat, which they do often. But do these progressives now crying fowl really believe they could protect Mr. Obama, as his Democratic challengers did all last year, throughout the rest of this campaign? Asking a question about Rev. Wright? A question about William Ayers? The horror! Seriously, is Senator Obama so frail that he shouldn't be subjected to questioning that should have come a long time ago and will inevitably come in the general election? If nothing else and at the very least, everyone in the Democratic party should want to know how he's going to handle this stuff if he's our nominee. Because there can be no doubt that the wingnuts will lock and load Barack's greatest hits, then share them with the electorate in a cascade of negative gifts.
Mind you, this is questioning I've been doing for a year and getting excoriated for it. So I feel Charlie and George's pain. Going for substance isn't easy amidst the Political Idol crowd.
The facts are that the progressive community and Obama supporters have done their candidate no favors by the kid glove treatment they've applied to all things having to do with him and his record, including his associations. What happened last night is a result of one year of people ignoring reality. That's right, reality. Because the closer Obama got to the nomination and the general election, the curtain would eventually be pulled back on every event in his life, good, bad and horror show, which includes Rev. Wright.
This is the reason we lose elections.
What, did Obama's adoring fans think they could hermetically seal him and protect him from the meanies out there, then simply deliver him to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue because "he's the one?" Good grief.
If Obama would have been put through his paces last fall, he might have been past this by now. If his own campaign had faced up to his associations long ago, head on, he wouldn't be dealing with this now.
Again, I'd blame Gibson and Stephanopoulos, but it's not their fault that someone, anyone finally asked questions that have been out there for months and months. It's not tabloid to ask about Ayers any more than it was tabloid to question Bill Clinton about his past. Hillary's been asked about everything more than once, as they reload to ask it all over again.
Oh, and as for Keith He's No Edward R. Murrow Olbermann, don't send a sportscaster to do a political analyst's job. Talking to Howard Wolfson, with Olbermann whining about the questions about Ayers, isn't doing us any favors either. He's just giving Obama fans a false sense of security. It's as if the only people dealing with reality and preparing for the Republican attack machine is the Clinton campaign. Olbermann is on planet Zen if he thinks that Ayers won't be part of the dialogue come September. (You know, because you never roll out a new campaign in August.)
We need a nominee that can walk through fire. Whoever we offer up should be able to withstand anything, and I do mean anything. Because that's what always comes at Democrats, with the traditional press inevitably having a thing for the guy on the other side. Considering that guy will be John McCain, the hero worship will be out in force.
No Democratic politician in the last 20 years has gotten a softer introduction onto the national stage than Barack Obama. Nobody has gotten an easier ride to the top step of presidential politics either. He paid for it last night.
Follow Taylor Marsh on Twitter: www.twitter.com/taylormarsh
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
Debates serve more than one purpose.
We need to see how the candidates think on their feet. When Obama has less than 48 hours to compose a well-thought-out answer to a question, he doesn't do so great.
He was less than stellar in how he threw criticism toward Hillary when he didn't have a good answer of his own. Hillary has never given a presidential pardon to anyone, and Obama can't have it both ways. She either can or she can't take some credit for the great Clinton years.
Obama answered questions that weren't asked on at least two occasions when he was too uncomfortable to answer the ones that were.
Obama's comparison of "staying home and baking cookies" was a really, really long stretch.
Obama has no problem thinking on his feet. Unlike Hillary, however, he isn't a glib and polished liar capable of propounding and expatiating on a fictional personal history. I grant you that being married to Bill Clinton qualifies her for something, but that something is most certainly not to be President of the U.S.
I'd like to know when he showed this quick thinking. I agree his thinking is mercurial.
As far as fictional personal history, have you ever heard of Audacity of Hope?
what's the matter, Obama? No pillow this time?
opps! sorry.
Thank god for ABC.
Nope, for some reason Hillary didn't cite a SKETCH COMEDY last night to whine and complain.
My focus now is on the actual job.
He'll never "lead" really.
He's just led nearly 1.5 million individual donors to take part in his cause. Hillary could never inspire and lead people like that.
Forgive some of us who dont buy the whole "republicans will do it, and its really despicable, so why shouldn't I" arguement Clinton was making yesterday. Presidential debates are never that intentially hostile towards one candidate, where you had the 3 of them ganging up on Obama putting him on the defensive over some of the most tabliod like fake issues you would find on the most conservative of blogs. It would be like having GW's biggest liberal critics and Kerry grilling him for 52min in the 2004 debates. Clinton for all her talk, has never been assaulted like that in a debate and when she has had to face hard questions it has been on mostly substantive issues which nobody can complain about. Republicans will never get the oppurtunity to corner Obama like that, they will make there outrageous claims in ad's but Obama will have proper time to prepare an adequately response.
It is no wonder Obama seemed aggitated, being blind sided like that from what are suppose to be neutral observers. But your right he should have had more short and direct answers on some of those questions but he will learn from this. If you believe you have real evidence that Obama is secretly a black radical, bomb making, unpatriotic muslim than yes you can and should ask those type of questions. But if you dont they serve no purpose but to perpetuate a myth.
I don't know how old you are Stringer, but the republicans will attack him with something new everyday. It will be a real learning experience for you and a real s***storm for him. I'm going to enjoy it.
Does Taylor do anything else with her life but whine about Hillary's bad press? Ma'am, do you realize how far from reality you've drifted?
How can this be the first time Obama's faced tough questions when it was all recycled gotcha stuff he's faced over and over again? And the depth of questions -- "Who loves America more -- you or Rev. Wright?" Lapel pins? Are you kidding?
And the questions somehow expose something? C'mon. Asking Obama about William Ayers, who he doesn't really know, but giving a free pass on Penn/Bill and the Colomian trade group? Then, following up with a -- "you were on the same charity's board of directors". What? Maybe he road on the same airplane as Gus Hall? How about the fact that Hillary was on the board of directors of Walmart -- the anti-woman, anti-worker health care, anti-union dinosaur and she crowed that she was proud to represent WalMart around the world.
At this point, the real question is this: why does HuffPost give a spot to Ms. Marsh at all -- why not just reserve the place for HillaryCli
You are in denial UrsaMajority. They have done everything but spoon feed and burp Obama!!!
I thought this was a very fair and accurate article.
No Faye, they did spoon feed and burp him and they powdered his bottom too.
Ayers and Dohrn also hosted a fundraiser for Obama at their apartment while he was running for the Illinois state senate. They were not the pardoned Weatherman to whom Obama referred during the ABC debate. Their convictions were thrown out for prosecutorial misconduct.
I was vehemently against the Vietnam War, but I never knew nor associated with anyone who would have condoned bombings and armored truck robbery, the latter of which resulted in fatalities. As with his friendship with Rezko, who, together with his associates, has backed Obama's prev ious political campaigns to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, a question of personal judgment arises. We've known for years who Hillary and Bill took money from. They've released all their tax returns. But Obama's past has been shrouded and protected by a rabid following. He got his butt kicked last night, but that was nothing compared to what the 527s have in store for him.
After listening to last night's debate and you think Americans gained anything from it, you are seriously blinded by your obsessive desire to have a woman as president.
To think that we care about re-hashing these same stories and beating them to death benefits anybody you've got another thing coming. Hillary loses because as always she was THE ATTACK DOG, Barack loses because he was kept on the defensive, and WE as Americans lost because this was a opportunity to discuss REAL issues.
You know, pertinent issues like how to get jobs back, how to prevent school drop outs, how to better our reputation with the world, how to decrease homelessness, how to prevent teen pregnancies, how to prevent school shootings, how to stop the rise of home foreclosur
I agree on nearly every point. Except the most important one.
This business of being able to answer responsibly to challenges has to do with the actual presidency, not winning the election.
McCain hasn't done it.
Hillary nearly flubbed it by trying to duck Bosnia.
Obama hasn't done it.
Setting aside all our differences, we, Americans, deserve a government that DOES IT.
Truly.
"So I feel Charlie and George's pain. Going for substance isn't easy amidst the Political Idol crowd."
Sorry, Taylor, but dragging out Wright, flag pins, "Bittergate", and Ayers wasn't "going for substance". Just because the opposition research Gibson and Steph unloaded on Obama helped your favored candidate, doesn't make it substantive.
Justifying it by saying the GOP will do the same thing in the fall, doesn't make it substantive. Honestly, won't the GOP take their cue and say, "Obama's Democratic opponent introduced this in the primary, so it's fair game". Please.
Gee, Taylor. I see you brought your fawning sycophants with you. For those of you not familiar with Taylor, this post here is very muted for public consumption. Check out her site if you want to find out what she's really like and how over-the-top these people are.
No thanks...I
I have a bad taste in my mouth just from the idiotic crap she has been allowed to print here !!!
Since when are question that have nothing to do with the major issue count as being good?
Yeah the Obama fan club is going to whine our party into oblivion come November.
I will type this daily on every blog it fits. This election is about the war. Vote Mccain and the blood of every lost life after that moment is on you. It is not flag pins, a pastor. or sniper fire. It is about the war.
Vote Obama and every life lost in the war, every family without healthcare and all of us affected by a terrible economy will be on your head. This election is about who can actually fix our many problems and who is just blowing smoke up our asses.
Obama should also tie all of this in with a serious discussion about real "elitism". What does it actually mean? Do Americans want a president who appears to be a "regular guy", but enacts policies that HURT regular guys? Or do they want someone who may not be able to bowl, and might not be your first choice to have a beer with, but will enact policies that are designed to make your life better?
Also . . . all of those questions . . . all of the media harping on trivialities, MUST make the rich and powerful laugh all the way to the bank. Cuz while 'regular guys' are busy digesting the media avalanche about bowling scores, lapel pins, orange juice and so on, the rich and powerful are doing all they can to pick YOUR pockets and INCREASE the gap between you and them.
The media does their work FOR them when they concentrate on the trivial at the expense of the real. It's time for 'regular guys' to DEMAND a focus on real issues that impact their lives. It's time for Obama and all progressives to DEMAND that the Media start treating adults like adults.
Of course, we can make exceptions. Fox News is there for adults who would rather be treated like ignorant children.
They asked Hillary about Bosnia.
They aske Obama about:
1. Rev Wright
2. Rev Wright's patriotism
3. Bitterness
4. Flag Pin
5. Bill Ayers
Yeah this debate was sooooooooo informative.
So Obama FINALLY gets of the the bulls*** questions that Hillary as been getting throughout this pdemocratic primary and you strat whinning like a little school girl. If Obama is SOOOOOOOOOO great he should have been able to handle these "Dumbass" questions. But no, he stood there like a friggen Deer in headlights wondering what should I say that wouls please everybody.
You're so right. Like a deer caught in headlights. No speech prepared or "borrowed". This time he couldn't just give his usual answer, " Yea, what she said".
Oh Taylor where have you been.
The absolute crying you and Mrs Clinton have been doing for 15 months and now here you come. Your bellyaching has sunk to a new low.
Hillary Clinton is toast. She will not be the nominee.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
